4.1. Hydrodynamics of the Surface Layer and a Legacy of Defined Periods A and B
Three-metre samples covered mostly the entire epilimnion and did not penetrate to metalimnion during the stratification of the Slapy reservoir. The same monitoring approach has persisted over the past decades, focusing on the surface or epilimnion layer despite variations in water bodies worldwide (recently, e.g., [
37]). Notably, this method is not universal, particularly in water bodies with shallow epilimnion that do not align perfectly with the euphotic zone.
Compared to great lakes with abundant ciliate data [
16,
25,
26,
30,
54], the sampled layer depth is shallow in the Slapy reservoir. However, hydrodynamic studies have proven its separation from deeper layers and homogeneity of the epilimnion during stratification periods (
Figure S2c,d). The water age was gradually increased until the end of stratification, reaching about 80 days, compared to a maximum of 40 days in the layer below <4 m, which is like the whole reservoir mean retention time <40 days [
38,
39,
41]. The difference in water ages in the layers was more pronounced in period
B. Resulting layer separation also means a physical separation of the layers’ ciliate assemblages, which may be completely independent of the metalimnetic processes. We could compare our data with those obtained in the surface layers of shallow but stratified lakes or lakes with shallow epilimnion. In another studied case, the Římov reservoir ciliates assemblage composition and activity in the epilimnion was also independent of a separated layer, into which the river incorporated [
35,
55,
56].
The general challenge in biological monitoring arises from shifts in a water body's hydrodynamics and related biological processes, prompting us to employ different analytical approaches due to variations in the onset of stratification. While attempts were made to normalise sampling timing, the resulting projections did not substantially alter the observed curves (
Figure 4). In period A, the ciliates presented two pronounced biomass peaks during stratification; a summer phytoplankton peak at the end moved backwards, and the abundance and biomass peaks coincided. During B, the stratification intermediate biomass peak lasted longer but decreased towards the culmination of a summer Chl
a peak, which was two-fold lower (
Figure 1). The observed changes towards the end of stratification may be influenced by differences in stratification duration (number of samplings during it). Thus, we did not apply such normalisation to the ciliate feeding behaviour groups.
Gaedke and Wickham [
17] normalised the processes related to a spring peak using the position of clear water. However, if the Slapy reservoir was sampled once every three weeks, we would have only one clear-water sampling. We partly applied the attempt of Straškrábová [
50], who normalised timing based on the Chl
a concentration marked in the graphs (
Figure 3). We found such a criterion useful when looking for the “ciliate season” covering principle ciliate peaks. The spring phytoplankton peak was put at Chl
a >5 μg/L, i.e., two sampling dates before the event of stratification; clear water was defined by Chl
a <7 μg/L, and the end of summer phytoplankton peak by Chl
a <10 μg/L, i.e., the end of stratification. It covered algivorous and nanoplankton-feeding ciliate spring peaks and summer ciliate maximums. Only autumn mixing /winter maximum of
Mesodinium spp. was excluded.
We applied the Chl
a criterion to characterise the years of the study using a non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) based on explanatory variables (T, DO, total phosphorus (with particles <40 µm), DIN, chlorophyll a, and abundances of bacteria, HNF and
Rhodomonas spp. (
Figure 10a). Years from periods A and B form distinct clusters with several exceptions. During period
A, the unusual year 1998 presented significant drops in DIN (
Figure S1), chlorophyll
a and HNF abundance, but bacteria abundance reached the highest value (
Figure 1). Contrary to this, the years 2006 and 2009 were of the highest DIN, chlorophyll
a and HNF abundance (
Figure 1 and Figure S1) during period
B. According to Jeppesen et al. [
57], recently, nitrogen has become a limited nutrient in various water bodies, sometimes surpassing the limitation of phosphorus. Though there was proven a different hydrodynamic separation in periods
A and
B, chosen through a phosphorus load drop before 2004 [
39,
40,
43], nitrogen limitation is another factor probably controlling the whole plankton growth, including ciliates.
4.2. Environment Ciliates’ Identification Issues
The taxonomy of plankton ciliates has changed during the study, partly due to QPS application, and the ciliate taxa frequently published from plankton in the 90s “disappeared”, being replaced by other names, sometimes based on an identification priority. In our work, this is the case of urotrichs, where our criteria for evaluating them were again limited to the size distribution (compare, [16,26,58-59). The problem cannot be solved simply using molecular methods since such an attempt would describe more cryptic species, which are probably both morphologically and ecologically the same or very similar; only scarce comparative studies between the identification methods were carried out in the environmental samples [
2,
28,
30,
60]. Also, the minute oligotrich species are challenging to identify according to their morphology in the samples [
58,
61].
Very similar cases are freshwater mixotrophic oligotrichs, where both genera
Pelagostrombidium and
Limnostrombidium were put to the same taxon (Pelagostrombidiidae). In theory, distinguishing them is easy, but there are some doubts that their morphology could vary according to the environmental conditions [
1]. On the species level of
Pelogostrombidium, molecular information on
P. fallax and
P. mirabile was also obtained using isolates, but the morphological details are challenging to observe in uncultured populations. Commonly,
Pelagostrombidium sp. is contrasted to
Limnostrombidium sp., but not
P. fallax vs. P. mirabile or
L. pelagicum vs. L. viride [
26,
62,
63,
64,
65]. Additionally, one may find significantly different two size categories of the cells within the population (this study).
Within tintinnids, the genera
Tintinnidium and
Tintinnopsis are well-defined [
1] based on protargol stain. However, identifying them by routinely counting the plankton samples is nearly impossible, while
Codonella cratera and
Membranicola could be well distinguished [
28]. The same is valid for the genera
Askenasia and related
Rhabdoaskenasia [
25] [
26,
66,
67,
68,
69]. It is easier to define mixotrophic and heterotrophic species, supposing that they represent
Askenasia chlorelligera, and according to the size,
Askenasia volvox and the others, which might not be correct [
1].
4.3. Ciliate Ecology in the Reservoir
The absolute biomasses of peaking ciliates in our study (interquartile range up to 30 μg/L) are well comparable with the results from, e.g., Lake Constance [
16,
54,
70,
71] but lower than in shallow eutrophic lakes [
59,
72,
73,
74]. This aligns with the observed oligotrophication trend in the Slapy reservoir [
40].
For the assortment of the ciliate species to feeding behaviour groups, we used detailed information on morphologically identified genera or species in QPS preparations (
Table 1). We applied an epifluorescence examination of the ciliate vacuole content in parallel for a long time. Additionally, we used fluorescently labelled prey to confirm direct picoplankton ingestion by different ciliates in various water bodies [
18,
20,
21,
75] and our results were cross-checked with publications from other groups, specialised on the investigation of the ciliate role in the microbial loop [
19,
76,
77].
Comparing the limnological variables, possible ciliate prey abundances, and the ciliates in the graphical presentation, one can state that everything is tightly coupled with the stratification of the reservoir along with a spring Chl
a peak (April to May). Generally, phytoplankton and the ciliate growth concurred with the revised PEG model [
4] but less with a scenario that Posch et al. [
78] proposed because of a weakened summer phytoplankton peak in the Slapy reservoir. However, periods
A and
B present different patterns, and in particular, apparent relations between the variables might be different throughout the year (Figures S2, 3–5 and 9). During period
A a typical eutrophic pattern was evident [
4]. In contrast, period
B exhibited characteristics more akin to oligotrophic conditions, like those found in Trauensee or Lake Zurich [
26,
28]. However, Pfister et al. [
59], based on a well-supported database on fresh- and brackish water ciliates, stated that the species composition is not significantly different in water bodies of different phosphorus and chlorophyll concentrations, which control, however, the abundance of ciliates. It could apply to the annual means or medinas of the ciliate distribution, but according to our results, it may differ during the annual growth cycle.
The NMDS analysis identifies possible causal relations between the study years using the ciliate data covering all the assemblage annual peaks (for data selection, see Chapter 3.3;
Figure 10). However, the grouping of years from periods
A and
B did not form such distinct clusters in the graph as in the case of environmental variables and possible ciliate prey.
The analysis identifies similar vector directions of the ciliate assemblage biomass, picoplankton filtering (PF) and raptorial and flagellate hunting ciliates (RH). PF were biomass dominating or important through the whole analysed period. Depending on the species composition, their first peak appeared before or during the stratification event, and the second passed the clear water phase until the end of the stratification. A common, halteriids (
Halteria grandinella,
Pelagohalteria viridis), and small strobilidiids (
Rimostrombidium humile,
R. brachykinetum and other unidentified species) were the most common bacterivores/omnivores of the lake communities [
16,
18,
26,
28,
73,
75]. On the other hand, the low importance of minute scuticociliates would be surprising if we did not consider the nearly permanent DO oversaturation of the Slapy reservoir surface while their optimum layer should be a local DO minimum [
29,
67]. Minute scuticociliates (
Cyclidium glaucoma,
Cinetochilum margaritaceum) were the most important species; it concurs with the observation of, e.g., Müller [
16]. Solitary peritrichs, mainly
Vorticella aqua-dulcis and
Vorticella sp. colonising diatoms
Fragillaria sp., and
Pseudohaplocaulus sp. on cyanobacteria
Anabaena sp. were the most common within the group [
26]. Recently, a new observation confirmed the omnivory of peritrichs and, in the case of pelagic free-swimming vorticellids also, efficient ingestion of nanoplanktonic, e.g., cryptomonads [
79,
80].
RH did not reach high biomass (except for scarce, e.g.,
Pelagodileptus sp. or
Lacrymaria sp., which were excluded from the analysis). Their occurrence with their food, e.g., HNF and related bacterioplankton is logical. As in other water bodies,
Askenasia sp. and
Lagynophrya spp., both heterotrophic and mixotrophic were common [
18,
26,
81]. Minute
Mesodinium spp. biomass replaced other RH during autumn-winter mixing (not included in the NMDS analysis). Though the median from period
A was very low, in period
B it was of the same value as the others with quite a high range. Freshwater mesodinia data are scarce [
82].
Heterotrophic nanoplankton filtering ciliates (HN) presented the vector direction very differently. The group dominated by tintinnids presented the biomass peak before the stratification event. However, their feeding preference should be like those of mixotrophic nanoplankton filtering ciliates (MN), culminating just at the event of stratification. It is probable that tintinnids were entering the surface layer of the Slapy reservoir with the water inlet. In the Římov reservoir, the tinitinnid peak was localised at the temperature of the inlet river water flow [
35,
55]).
Rimostrombidium lacustris should have the same feeding preferences as MN [
47], but also, the ciliate maximum was observed when
Rhodomonas spp. abundances would not support the ciliate growth.
The algae hunting (
AH) ciliates´ vector is almost the same as that of MN. It could be related to their preferred prey, minute photosynthetic cryptomonads, including
Rhodomonas spp. [
47,
79,
81,
83], but strombidiids use them mainly as a source of kleptoplasts [
84,
85]. On the other, the feeding group maximums occurred in different periods. AH winter/spring peaks were composed first of
B. planctonicum, which should prefer temperatures below 18 °C [
86]. It was followed by
Urotricha spp. and, particularly in period
B, by
Histiobalantium spp. during the spring phytoplankton peak [
26,
28,
30,
47] but already dropping with the stable stratification, when MN reached their maximum.
After a short clear water phase (periodically observed in one sampling date), both AH and MN could develop again, though their growth was not already supported by rhodomonads; the discrepancy was already observed by Müller et al. [
81]. We suppose both groups were eating also upon HNF, which were invisible in the feeding vacuoles. Ingestion of bacteria by minute prostomes (urotrichs,
B. planctonicum) was negligible [
18], and we never observed ingestion of them by
Histiobalantium spp., as proven in cultures [
81] but discarded, when suitable flagellate food was present [
79,
87]. Contrary to the above-mentioned experiments, we observed
B. planctonicum at water temperatures up 22 °C during the summer phytoplankton peak.
However, feeding of strombidiids is not limited to nanophytoplankton, and they are efficient HNF and bacteria feeders [
18,
77,
88,
89], which explains their elevated biomass even in a lack of cryptomonads.
Median sampling results showing the annual cycle of the ciliate behavioural groups (
Figure 11) could not be generalised because the range of data in any long-term monitored water body is wide due to “unusual years” (
Figure 2 and
Figure 10). The problem behind such observation is related to the “wished sampling period”, according to the ciliate generation times and monitoring programme possibilities. It was repeatedly shown that significant changes in the ciliate assemblage used to take place within a week period.
In other short studies carried out by our team, e.g., in the Římov reservoir, we sampled either the surface/epilimnion layer or the phase limits (thermocline/oxycline) or directly the river body within the reservoir water column [
18,
56,
67,
88]. It was proven that our reservoirs’ ciliate assemblage activity is not located on the surface, in the DO oversaturated layer, and that its importance is in the below-metalimnion layers with frequent DO depletion. On the one hand, it explains a predictable ciliate assemblage growth and observed discrepancies between the ciliates and their supposed prey abundance. The same pattern is known from the water bodies worldwide [
19,
21,
25,
26,
28,
29,
32,
33,
34].