text:
You shall not post this on anywhere for public use
You shall not sell this for public use
Do not replicate and forward without permission
Do not claim this as yours
Do Not Translate it into your languange and claim ownership
The episode begins with a recap of the previous episode's events. We now pick up right where the last episode left off, with Grovyle confused due to Luvdisc's Sweet Kiss. Ash calls for Grovyle to snap out of it, but it jumps to one side and begins repeatedly banging its head on one of the land structures! Ash's friends agree that this is going nowhere fast, and Brock calls out to Ash, saying that he should recall Grovyle. But before Ash can do anything, Luvdisc attacks with Water Gun! Due to the confusion, Grovyle was completely unprepared for this, and faints. Brock comments on how the combination of hitting itself and being blindsided with the Water Gun added up to the loss. Ash recalls Grovyle, and Juan says he's going to have to do a lot better than that if he wants to get into the Hoenn League. Ash responds by sending out Corphish.
Meanwhile, we see that a disguised Team Rocket (with James in his Juan disguise from the previous episode) is at the amphitheater that Juan performed at. Jessie, Meowth, and Wobbuffet are trying to draw an audience for another performance by Juan, the famous Water Artist. Three women approach, and say that they thought Juan was at his Gym. Jessie laughs and says Juan finished the Gym Battle in no time. James then makes his appearance, doing an admirable impression of Juan, even kissing the hand of one of the ladies. Jessie and Meowth, off to the side, hope James remembers that he's acting.
Back to the Gym battle, Corphish is now swimming at full speed towards Luvdisc. Ash calls for a Bubblebeam, but Luvdisc dodges and hits Corphish with Water Gun, sending it back far enough to slam against one of the land pieces. Luvdisc follows up with Sweet Kiss, but Corphish is able to dodge and counter with Bubblebeam. Luvdisc dives underwater to dodge, but Ash has Corphish hit the water from midair with Crabhammer. That throws Luvdisc above the surface, so Ash calls for a Vicegrip. The spray from Corphish's Crabhammer is raining back onto the battlefield now. Juan tells Luvdisc to dodge, which it does, and it then starts zipping around at great speed! May and Max are surprised at this, but Brock explains that Luvdisc is taking advantage of its Swift Swim ability. May now realizes that the spray from the Crabhammer is serving the same function as rain, to trigger Swift Swim. Luvdisc now uses Water Gun, but Ash has Corphish dodge and hit the water with a Bubblebeam, calming it down and ending the spray. Corphish now follows up with Crabhammer, sending Luvdisc reeling back to slam into another piece of land. It twirls around and faints. Ash congratulates Corphish, and Juan recalls Luvdisc, saying it did its best. Ash's friends now suspect that Juan is saving his best Pokemon for last. Juan now sends out a Whiscash. Corphish starts out with Bubblebeam, but Whiscash counters by using Surf. The Bubblebeam can't do much against the wave Whiscash is riding. Whiscash jumps off the wave, and its body glows a little as it falls in for a Rock Smash! Whiscash lands hard on Corphish, and when the dust clears, Corphish is knocked out! Juan congratulates Whiscash, while Ash can hardly believe how strong it is.
Meanwhile, back to Team Rocket, James has now started his performance. He holds up two fans (ironically, with Team Rocket's logo on them), and we see three tiny little jets of water coming from him—one from each fan, and one from his head. While Jessie talks about Juan, we see a view from behind James, revealing hoses leading from the three points where we saw water back to a container. Meowth rhythmically pushes on a pump to keep the water flowing. James waves his fans around a bit, but the crowd (including the three women from earlier) is completely unimpressed. They're used to performances like we saw at the beginning of the previous episode. James mumbles to Jessie that the crowd doesn't seem too thrilled, and Jessie agrees. She now announces to the crowd that "Juan" will conduct an autograph and photo session after the show, and this manages to excite them.
Back to the Gym, Ash tells a recalled Corphish that it did its best, and sends out Swellow. May and Max think that Swellow's ability to fly should help it in dodging attacks. Swellow rushes in for a Quick Attack, but Whiscash stops it by grabbing Swellow in its whiskers! Whiscash then uses Tickle, as Swellow squirms in discomfort. Max explains that Tickle lowers the opponent's Attack and Defense, and Brock comments on how unpredictable Juan is. Juan now tells Whiscash to finish it off with Hyper Beam. Swellow can do nothing but watch, and May and Max cringe and turn away. The attack strikes, sending Swellow back, landing on the ground and skidding into one of the tall structures! Swellow hits it so hard that it falls over, creating a large cloud of dust. Juan thinks the round is over, but Swellow emerges from the cloud, still ready to battle! Juan seems impressed. Ash calls for an Aerial Ace, but Juan has Whiscash dive underwater to dodge. Swellow, however, keeps right on going, diving into the water and striking! The attack knocks Whiscash back above the surface again and sends it flying. Juan calls for a Hyper Beam, so Whiscash grabs a pillar with its whisker to turn around, and fires the attack. Swellow emerges from the water and uses Quick Attack to dodge, and follows up with Aerial Ace. Juan tells Whiscash to dive underwater again. Swellow aims for Whiscash as it dives toward the water, and both Pokemon strike the water at once! The water splashes up around them, but Swellow flies up above it. When everything clears up, we see a KOed Whiscash!
Juan recalls Whiscash, and tells Ash that his attack combinations have been impressive, especially the way Swellow uses its Quick Attack to dodge. May and Max are happy, but Brock reminds them that Pikachu and Swellow are the only Pokemon Ash has left now. He reasons that both have already been in battle and taken hits, no doubt this last Pokemon of Juan's will be his strongest, AND it has yet to battle. Juan confirms this by explaining that he saved his most cherished partner for last, and sending out Milotic! Milotic starts with a Hydro Pump, but Swellow is able to dodge and strike with Aerial Ace. The attack sends Milotic back, but it stops itself and uses Iron Tail. Swellow dodges by using Double Team. Milotic counters with Twister, striking all of the clones, including the real Swellow, and slamming it against the ceiling! Swellow falls on top of a large block, out cold. Ash & friends are amazed at Milotic's strength, but Brock says it's no wonder, since Milotic is Juan's first partner and strongest Pokemon.
Ash has no other choice now but to send out Pikachu. After Juan warns Ash to brace himself for a tough match, Ash has Pikachu start out with Thunder. The attack seems to be doing good damage, and Ash's friends explain between them that the combination of the type advantage and the fact that Milotic is in the water is contributing to the damage. The Thunder finally ends, and Juan calmly calls for a Recover. Milotic's body glows, and it visibly looks healed! Ash and Pikachu are stunned; Ash didn't know Milotic could use Recover. Juan says that this move was quite useful in his Pokemon Contests.
We now get to see how Team Rocket is doing. There's quite a long line of women, awaiting their chance for a free picture. Jessie explains, much to their disappointment, that they first have to deposit some money into her box. The crowd had thought this was a free session. However, they accept the idea when Jessie goes on to explain that they'd also get a "commemorative badge" with a picture of Juan, and Wobbuffet holds up a box of little bags that the "badges" come in. (All the bags, ironically, have Team Rocket's logo on them.) The women drop in their money, one by one, and take their badges. Jessie thanks the crowd, then whispers to James that it's time to go. James protests, thinking about the autographs, but Jessie hooks her arm around his neck and drags him away. The crowd then realizes that the "badges" they have are actually just bottlecaps! James, still being dragged, is upset over the loss of more of his collection. Jessie and Meowth say that the most important thing is to get away with the money, but the crowd, led by the three women from earlier, turns against them. One of them sends out her Blastoise to use Hydro Pump, sending TR blasting off again. Blastoise catches the box of money that TR dropped when the attack hit.
Meanwhile, back at the Gym, Ash calls for an Iron Tail. Milotic counters with its own Iron Tail, sending Pikachu flying. Milotic follows up with Twister, sending a column of water up at Pikachu and catching it in the vortex! Ash calls for a Thunder, which electrifies the whole column and makes it dissipate. Pikachu then follows up with Quick Attack, striking and then landing on a block. May wonders what just happened, and Max and Brock realize that the Thunder vaporized the water, dispelling the Twister. Juan calls for a Hydro Pump, but Pikachu jumps off the block to dodge, and uses Thunderbolt. Milotic shakes off the attack and uses Recover again. Milotic is a little tired now, but Pikachu seems more so. Ash now realizes he has to figure out a way to stop Milotic from using Recover. Juan tells Milotic to dive underwater, and Ash gets an idea. Pikachu runs straight for the water, and Milotic emerges to do an Iron Tail. Pikachu dodges, and begins running up Milotic's body! Milotic uses Hydro Pump, but Pikachu dodges that too. It leaps forward, and grabs Milotic's two red fins! Without stopping, it flips Milotic over its head and into the water! This totally catches Juan off guard, and Ash calls for a full-power Thunder. The attack not only courses through Milotic, but lights up the whole water portion of the field. A column of electrified water bursts up and hits the ceiling, and the whole gym shakes for a bit. When the steam clears, the water is still electrified, and we see both Pokemon float to the surface. Pikachu is standing on a knocked-out Milotic! The judge declares Ash the winner, and he celebrates with Pikachu. His friends rejoice as well, and Brock comments on the brilliant strategy Ash used. Juan recalls and thanks Milotic.
Later, outside the Gym, Juan presents Ash with his well-deserved Rain Badge. After Ash does his trademark badge pose, Juan and Sebastian tell him that the Hoenn League starts in three months, in Ever Grande City. Ash and Pikachu agree to do some serious training before then. Juan also tells May that the next Pokemon Contest is in Pacifidlog Town. Max consults the PokeNav and finds that Pacifidlog isn't too far away, so May says they should head there next. Juan wishes them well in their journey
Thanks To Geodude For Writing this for us
388: Eight Ain't Enough
388: Sootopolis Gym! Juan, Artist of Water! (Part 2)!
Sootopolis City
Ash beats Juan and wins the Rain Badge
All Content is
©Copyright of Serebii.net 1999-2018.
Pokémon And All Respective Names are Trademark & © of Nintendo 1996-2018


text:
iPhone 4S has extra infrared sensor for Siri raise-to-speak
If you have been wondering how Siri reacts so quickly when you "raise to speak", the answer is a tiny infrared LED that's added into the proximity sensor in the iPhone 4S. iFixIt discovered the sensor after a second look, determining that it shines brightly whenever the screen is activated. The light isn't visible to the human eye but it's there. And it's constantly letting Siri know how close your face is to your iPhone 4S.
It does raise a few questions, though. IR is fairly light on battery drain but every little bit extra does add up. Also, iPhone 4 and other older models lack the extra IR sensor, making it seem even more unlikely Apple will ever offer an official port.
If you're interested in seeing how it works you can check out iFixIt's video via the link below.
Source: iFixIt
iMore Newsletter
Get the best of iMore in your inbox, every day!
iMore senior editor from 2011 to 2015.
(Homer Simpson voice) Mmmmmm... iFixit girl...
I wish she would show us her boobs!!!
??? Georgia what's come over you?
I wish yud show yurs...dextermorph@gmail lol
I wish yud show yurs...dextermorph@gmail lol
id stuff her to the gills for sure. her boobs look nice, Id like to see more!
possible this could be the battery drain huh?
Great for me......!!! nothing to worry about where is it how its gonna respond.....!!!!http://www.1socialmediaagency.com/
Have a look to our blog talking about Iphone 4S Siri-ously
One of the most exciting things about the iPhone 4S for ditto's Tech Lab, is the new Siri assistant. It is truly revolutionary and will change the way in which we use smartphones, mobile devices, and possibly even computers forever. A bold statement, but Siri deserves it...http://www.ditto.tv/blog/2011/11/ditto-is-speaking-siri-ously/

subset: commoncrawl


text:
FRIENDS OF NAS OTTUMWA is a non-profit organization whose mission is to develop a Naval Aviation & Space Museum in the original Administration Building at the former Naval Air Station (NAS) Ottumwa, Iowa.
Following the tragic attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, the United States Navy scrambled to drastically increase their inventory of combat ready airplanes and pilots. As part of that effort the U.S. Navy commissioned the construction of several air training bases in amongst the farm fields of the Midwest. Naval Air Station (NAS) Ottumwa was one of them. It's mission was to provide Primary Training of future Naval Aviators. In addition to the main base, the Navy also built and operated numerous practice fields in the Ottumwa area to provide additional space for the cadets and instructors to log their long hours of practice time.
Our vision is to create a museum that will preserve the rich history of NAS Ottumwa and honor the hard work and sacrifices of the patriots who were stationed there. Our museum will serve to educate future generations about the important contributions made at NAS Ottumwa in training the finest Naval Aviators in the world. From March 1943 to the end of the war, NAS Ottumwa graduated 4,626 new Navy pilots. However, this story isn't only about the pilots. Those intrepid pilots were propelled into the air by the dedication of thousands of military and civilian personnel working behind the scenes at NAS Ottumwa. Their work was also critical to winning ultimate victory in World War II.
Following World War II, many NAS Ottumwa trained Naval Aviators went on to distinguished military careers and service in the Korean and Vietnam conflicts. Also in the pioneering years of the U.S. space program. We intend to recognize that service as well.
Follow us on Facebook at U.S. Naval Air Station Ottumwa, Iowa
"Friends of NAS Ottumwa Corp." is a non-profit IRS 501(c)(3) corporation.


text:
Sponsored Ad
Missouri Passions : 'Missouri' Member Created Groups*
No member created groups defined for this site... yet.
Click To Open & Search Missouri Passions Groups Listed Above
Important Groups Information
If you are a member of Missouri Passions, and you see a 'Group' above that you
would like to join, click the My Groups link.
PLEASE NOTE: The 'Groups' feature works best when you ONLY join groups that describe you, or your interests. Members in Groups can be seen in the site and in Search Engines. Do NOT join Groups that do not specifically match you as a person or Groups that you do not feel comfortable being seen in. Groups are designed to allow people to find you.
*In some of our sites, groups reference specific brands, brand names, books, movies, television shows, company names, or people. Passions Network, Inc. would like to make it clear that all copyrights and trademarks are owned by their respective owners and/or companies.
- Missouri Online Personals
- Missouri Flirt
- Gay Life Partners
- Be Choosie
- Zoosk
- Friendfinder
- Singles Online
- Local Personals Online
- Dating Buddies
- Sweet And Casual


text:
I've been rehearsing this blog post in my head for the last month, but now that I have to write it, I don't know what to say. I still don't know what to title it, so hopefully that reveals itself to me before the final period is typed.
I started this blog for selfish purposes. I wanted to write about sports, so I had writing samples to send to potential employers. That's all. I had no aspirations to make friends. I had no desire to explore different topics. I didn't want to leave my niche – bloggers need a niche.
Good things happen when you least expect it.
Little did I know, bloggers don't need a niche. Nor do we need to stay in a bubble. Once I figured that out, this blog was no longer just about me. It was about the people who took the time to read it.
A few days ago, The Captain's Speech reached 5000 followers.
I don't know what that number means, really. But I do know what I think about when I see it.
I think about all the friendships that have been made.
I think about the people who told me my words had an impact on their life.
I think about the person who told me they enjoy my humour and to never stop giving my unique view of things because they read my blog as a way to forget – for a little while – about the rough situation in their life.
There's more to that than I'll share, but I tear up every time I think about it.
And who am I?
I'm just a person putting one word in front of the next. I don't know what I'm doing in life. I mention pizza a lot. I start too many sentences with "And". And I have no idea how to write a concise blog post, as evidenced by my 1466 word per post average in 2018 – find yours on the insights tab of a stats page near you.
I am truly grateful for all the nice things you have said to me over the years. The blogging community is incredible and I couldn't have imagined such a welcoming group of people on the internet.
When I first came into this, I was just coming out of university and about to face the reality that friendships from school slowly fade away over time. I didn't know that strangers on the internet would be there to catch me when I needed support.
Five years later, I talk to more bloggers on a regular basis than people I know in real life.
A couple of years ago, a group chat was made. It consists of Meghan, Jess, Chris, and myself. I had been blog friends with Meghan and Jess for about a year, while Chris and I have known each other for about sixteen.
That group chat quickly became, and still is, one of my favourite things.
Explaining the dynamic between the four of us is impossible. It's like we're roommates, but we're not, yet we still scream through the wall knowing someone will respond.
In life, I think we all just want to find a place where we fit in. And that includes finding people we like to be around.
That's why on the first day of every school year, we'd look through the class list, or around the room, trying to find the people with whom we fit. If there's a group project, who are my people?
Because no one wants to be completely alone. I'm certain we've all felt that at least once in our lives.
We all need someone else, and in the blogging world, our words are the great unifier.
When I was in university, I had a few different friend groups as a result of living in residence each year. I don't like separate groups, so I introduced each group to each other and made it one big happy family.
In a way, I think I've tried to do that with this blog.
When I go looking for new blogs to follow, I often find ones that don't have many followers but are putting out content I really enjoy. I'll always have a soft spot for bloggers like that. Not because I feel sorry for them or want to give them a charity follow, but because I've been in their shoes.
I know how tough it is to be writing for 8 people, 4 seemingly fake accounts, and 2 other skeptical ones.
You feel like you're not being heard. You tell yourself you're writing for yourself, but you still wish someone else read your work. As much as we can find ourselves through our writing, we hope it finds someone else, too.
When you see me nominating a bunch of bloggers in these blog award posts, I hope you're clicking the links because that's my small way of trying to bring everyone together.
I don't want bloggers to give up because they don't have hundreds or thousands of followers. I want to support them.
The most important post I've ever written was when I had 22 followers. The size of your audience doesn't make your words mean less.
And I know it's probably easy for you to think, "Oh, he's just preaching from the hilltop known as The 5000 Club." You're missing the point if you think that. There is no hilltop. There never has been. We're all on the same playing field.
If you're looking for tips on how to get 5000 followers, I don't have any. I only have truths. And the truth is, words bring people together. They always will.
Well, that's it. I'm sure you'll all get tired of me and my jokes eventually though, right?
If so, just give me two weeks notice so I can host an Unfollowing Party. It'll be like an episode of Oprah, except everyone in the audience returns their free car.
I'm going to go now. Thanks again for all the support!
Keep writing your words because, I can assure you, they mean something to someone.
– Paul, The Captain's Speech


text:
MIAMI (AP) — A Florida judge on Friday overturned the
state's ban on same-sex marriage in a ruling that applies to Miami-Dade
County, agreeing with a judge in another county who made a similar
ruling last week. Still, no marriage licenses will be issued for gay
couples in either county any time soon to allow for appeals.
ruling by Circuit Judge Sarah Zabel mirrors the decision made earlier by
Monroe County Circuit Judge Luis Garcia. Both found the constitutional
amendment approved by Florida voters in 2008 discriminates against gay
people. They said it violates their right to equal protection under the
law guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment.
couples from marrying solely on the basis of their sexual orientation
serves no governmental interest," Zabel wrote. "It serves only to hurt,
to discriminate, to deprive same-sex couples and their families of equal
dignity, to label and treat them as second-class citizens, and to deem
them unworthy of participation in one of the fundamental institutions of
our society."
The effect of Garcia's ruling was put on hold when
Republican Attorney General Pam Bondi filed notice of appeal. Zabel also
stayed the effect of her ruling indefinitely to allow time for appeals,
which could take months, and Bondi promptly followed up Friday by
filing an appeal notice in the Miami-Dade case. The county of 2.6
million people is in the top 10 in population in the U.S.
Both judges were appointed by former Republican Gov. Jeb Bush and have been re-elected.
legal battleground will next shift to the Miami-based 3rd District
Court of Appeal for both cases, and most likely after that to the state
Supreme Court. Nevertheless, Friday's ruling was cause for celebration
for gay couples across the Miami area.
"It means so much for a
court to recognize our family and say that we must be treated equally,"
said Catherina Pareto, one of the plaintiffs in the case. "We love this
state and want nothing more than to be treated as equal citizens who
contribute to the community and help make Florida an even better place
for everyone who lives here."
Same-sex ban supporters argue that
the referendum vote should be respected and that Florida has sole
authority to define marriage in the state. The Florida amendment defined
marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
Gay marriage
proponents have won more than 20 legal decisions around the country
since the U.S. Supreme Court last year struck down a key part of the
federal Defense of Marriage Act. Those rulings remain in various stages
of appeal. Many legal experts say the U.S. Supreme Court may ultimately
have to decide the question for all states.
Bondi said in a
statement about the Monroe County case that "with many similar cases
pending throughout the entire country, finality on this constitutional
issue must come from the U.S. Supreme Court."
Nineteen states and the District of Columbia allow gay people to marry.
Gov. Rick Scott has said he supports the amendment but opposes
discrimination. His top Democratic challenger, former Gov. Charlie
Crist, supports efforts to overturn it.
Florida has long been a
gay rights battleground. In the 1970s, singer and orange juice
spokeswoman Anita Bryant successfully campaigned to overturn a Dade
County ordinance banning discrimination against gays. The county
commission reinstated those protections two decades later.
1977, Florida became the only state prohibiting all gay people from
adopting children. A state court judge threw out that law in 2008,
finding "no rational basis" for that ban, and two years later, the state
decided not to appeal, making gay adoption legal.
Gay marriage
opponents said the rulings overturning the same-sex marriage ban
disenfranchise nearly five million voters — the 62 percent who approved
it nearly six years ago. Repealing the amendment would require at least
60 percent support.
"With one stoke of a pen, a mere trial judge
has attempted to overthrow an act of direct democracy by five million
Floridians who defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman,"
said John Stemberger, president Florida Family Policy Council, which
pushed for passage of the amendment.
The cities of Orlando, Miami
Beach and Key Biscayne filed legal papers supporting the gay couples'
quest to have the marriage ban ruled unconstitutional. A separate
lawsuit is pending in Tallahassee federal court seeking to both overturn
Florida's gay marriage ban and force the state to recognize same-sex
marriages performed in other states.
MIAMI (AP) — A Florida judge on Friday overturned the


text:
Services on Demand
Related links
- Cited by Google
- Similars in Google
Water SA
On-line version ISSN 1816-7950
Print version ISSN 0378-4738
Water SA vol.38 n.2 Pretoria Jan. 2012
The response of microalgal biomass and community composition to environmental factors in the Sundays Estuary
Daisy Kotsedi; Janine B Adams*; Gavin C Snow
Department of Botany, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, PO Box 77000, Port Elizabeth 6031, South Africa
The Sundays Estuary is permanently open to the sea and experiences regular freshwater inflow in the form of agricultural return flows with large supplies of nutrients. The objectives of this study were to measure microalgal biomass and community composition and relate these to freshwater inflow, water quality and other environmental variables. These data can then be used in setting the ecological water requirements of the estuary. Surveys in August 2006, March 2007, February, June and August 2008 showed that salinity less than 10, expressed in practical salinity units, mostly occurred from 12.5 km from the mouth in the middle reaches of the estuary, which was also where the highest water column chlorophyll a (>20 μg.ℓ-1) was found. The study showed that different groups of microalgae formed phytoplankton blooms during individual sampling sessions. These included blooms of green algae (August 2006), flagellates (March 2007), dinoflagellates (June 2008) and diatom species (February and August 2008). The estuary was then sampled over 5 consecutive weeks from March to April 2009 to identify environmental factors that support different microalgal bloom species. Phytoplankton blooms were found during Weeks 1, 4 and 5 from the middle to the upper reaches of the estuary. It was shown that diatoms occurred in blooms during warm, calm conditions whereas wind-mixing and reduced temperature, as a result of a cold front during 17 to 19 March 2009, promoted the dominance of flagellates throughout the estuary although they were present at all times. Dominant diatom species (Cylindrotheca closterium, Cyclotella atomus and Cyclostephanus dubius) indicated brackish, nutrient-rich water. Nanoplankton (2.7 - 20 μm) was dominant during each week sampled and contributed 55 - 79% to the phytoplankton biomass. Maximum benthic chlorophyll a was found 12.5 km from the mouth. This study is the first to show successive chlorophyll a blooms consisting of different phytoplankton groups in an estuary, an indication of the eutrophic state of the system.
Keywords: Sundays Estuary, phytoplankton, microphytobenthos, chlorophyll a, environmental factors
The Sundays River Estuary is an important recreational and tourist attraction, and now forms part of the Addo Elephant National Park. The estuary ranks 39 out of the top 50 South African estuaries (Turpie et al., 2002) in terms of biodiversity conservation importance. The estuary is permanently open, increasing its importance, as only 18% of South African estuaries have a permanently open connection with the sea. The Sundays Estuary does not have extensive intertidal sand banks, mudflats or salt marshes. Microalgae contribute 95% to primary production as there is little suitable habitat for macrophytes (Adams et al., 2008).
Phytoplankton play a significant role in nutrient cycling; they serve as a primary food source and are used as indicators of change in ecological conditions because they are sensitive to environmental perturbations (Lucas et al., 1999; Paerl et al., 2006). Benthic microalgae also play an important role in estuaries because they stabilise the sediment surface through growth and the production of extracellular polymeric substances (Underwood et al., 1995; Maclntyre et al., 1996); regulate nutrient fluxes/cycles and gas exchange (Sündback et al., 2003; Sündback et al., 2004); and serve as a highly nutritious food source for various benthic and pelagic fauna (Kibirige and Perissinotto, 2003; Nozais et al., 2005). The diversity of microphytobenthos species also provide numerous, sensitive indicators of environmental change and the specific conditions of their habitat.
As microalgae are an important source of primary production in the Sundays Estuary, studies of biomass and species composition are necessary to understand the functioning of the estuary. Phytoplankton in the Sundays Estuary were first investigated by Archibald (1981), with a focus on the taxonomy of diatoms, and subsequently Hilmer (1990) showed that the recurrent formation and decay of flagellate blooms was closely related to the spring-neap tide cycle. Blooms formed when semi-closed circulation increased the residence time of the water during stratified periods, usually at neap tides. Phytoplankton blooms have been recorded in the upper reaches of the estuary, when there was a water residence time of 7 neap tidal cycles and 3 spring tidal cycles (MacKay and Schumann, 1990). Phytoplankton from groups such as flagellates, dinoflagellates, and euglenoids have been recorded in the Sundays Estuary (Hilmer, 1990). Although diatom species have been shown to be continually present, they generally occur at low densities (Archibald, 1981; Hilmer, 1990) and high densities have been recorded shortly after flooding events (Jerling, 1994). Dinoflagellates have been found to be the dominant phyto-plankton community (Hilmer, 1990; Jerling, 1994), particularly in the vertically stratified middle reaches of the estuary, and cyanophytes have only been recorded in the upper half of the estuary (Hilmer, 1990; Archibald, 1981). Most blooms identified by Hilmer (1990) were caused by the dinoflagellate Katodinium rotundatum and a chlorophyte Micromonas pusilla.
Currently, estuarine research in South Africa has shifted its focus to temporarily open/closed estuaries (Gama et al., 2005; Thomas et al., 2005; Froneman, 2006; Perissinotto et al., 2006; Anandraj et al., 2008; Whitfield et al., 2008) with only a few recent studies focusing on permanently open estuaries. However, the Sundays Estuary has received great research attention in the recent past. The aim of the present study was to determine the microalgal biomass and community composition of the Sundays Estuary, a permanently open estuary. The objective was to gain insight into the response of microalgae to environmental conditions which can be useful in the freshwater inflow management of this important type of estuary in South Africa.
Materials and methods
Study area
The Sundays River originates from the Sneeuberge and flows in a south to south-easterly direction. It passes through Graaff Reinet, Kirkwood and Addo in the fertile Sundays River Valley (Jerling, 1994). The river empties into the Indian Ocean at Algoa Bay, northeast of Port Elizabeth, through the Sundays Estuary (33° 43' S; 25° 51' E), and is permanently open to the sea (Fig. 1). Natural river flows are artificially augmented to ameliorate the poor water quality, in order to satisfy urban demands to Port Elizabeth and the irrigation demands in the catchment. In addition, some of the transferred water is allocated to freshening and flushing out of the Sundays River and there are high return flows from irrigation schemes. As a result, natural flows to the estuary have increased and are unlikely to decrease with the implementation of future schemes and water allocations in the catchment (Ninham Shand, 2008). Due to the strong inputs of freshwater resulting in large supplies of nutrients, the Sundays Estuary has a water column-based food web (Adams et al., 2008). The estuary has an intertidal zone mostly less than 5 - 6 m in width (Reddering and Esterhuysen, 1981) and there are no extensive intertidal sand banks, mud flats or salt marshes.
Field collection
Rainfall records of the nearby city of Port Elizabeth indicate that rainfall has generally been highest during winter, between May and August, and the lowest in summer, between December and February. Samples were collected on 19 February, 3 June and 16 August 2008 in order to cover a range of freshwater inflow scenarios; from low river flow during summer to high flow in winter. There were 7 sites in total, which were 0.2, 3.8, 8.0, 9.9, 12.5, 16.3 and 21.9 km from the mouth (Fig. 1). Data sets from previous research (conducted on 17 August 2006 and 29 March 2007) similar to this study were incorporated into the current study.
For the short-term study, samples were collected on 13, 19, 26 March, then 2 and 9 April 2009 (referred to as Weeks 1 - 5) from approximately 09:00 to 14:00 at 5 sites along the Sundays Estuary. The sites were situated 3.8, 8, 9.9, 12.5 and 16.3 km from the mouth. Spring tides occurred in Weeks 1, 3 and 5 ' and sampling started during the ebbing tide on these dates at approximately 09:00. Neap tides occurred during Weeks 2 and 4 and sampling started during the flooding tide.
The physico-chemical and biological data collected on the first 5 sampling trips (August 2006 to August 2008) are indicated in Table 1. All variables listed in Table 1 were measured during the short-term study in March/April 2009.
Water quality variables
Water quality variables including temperature and salinity were recorded at each site using a 650 MDS YSI multiprobe. Additionally, rainfall data was obtained from Weather SA (http://www.weathersa.co.za). Water samples from the surface and bottom depths at each site were collected for nutrient analyses, and were filtered with a 0.45 μm pore size syringe through Millipore filters (Millex-HV Hydrophilic PVDF) and then stored in polyethylene sampling bottles. Samples were stored in a 'cooler box' (portable ice chest) in the field and stored in a freezer until further analysis. Samples were sent to the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) in Stellenbosch and analysed by accredited analytical laboratories using an auto-analyser (detection limit for dissolved nitrate, nitrite and total ammonium was 0.17 μM, for soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP) 0.32 μM and for dissolved reactive silicate 0.36 μM) according to the methods described in CSIR (2002). Dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN) is a combination of nitrate, nitrite and ammonium and dissolved inorganic phosphorus (DIP) is soluble reactive phosphorus. Samples were collected for nutrients on 29 March 2007, 19 February, 3 June and 16 August 2008, and during the short-term study in March/April 2009.
Phytoplankton biomass (chlorophyll a)
Water samples were collected using a 500 mℓ pop-bottle at the surface (0 m), 0.5, 1, 2, 3 and 4 m (if possible) depths. The samples were gravity-filtered under vacuum through 1.2 μm Whatman GF/C filters. The filter papers were placed into glass vials containing 10 mℓ of 95% ethanol (Merck 4111) and left overnight for chlorophyll a extraction at 1 - 2°C. After extraction, chlorophyll a spectrophotometric determinations were carried out according to Nusch (1980). Absorbances, before and after acidification of the extracts with 0.1 N HCl, were read using a UV/VIS spectrophotometer at 665 nm.
For the short-term study, size-fractionated chlorophyll a was measured. Phytoplankton samples were serially filtered through a 20 μm nitex screen mesh, 2.7 μm Whatman GF/D filter paper and, finally, through a 0.7 μm Whatman GF/F filter paper which might allow small cyanobacterial cells through. During the short-term study, a maximum acid ratio of 1.7 was used instead of an after-acid reading. The incorrect concentration for HCl was used in the after-acid readings; therefore a maximum acid ratio of 1.7 was used with the readings without acid. For the short-term study the following equation was used:
Eb665 = absorbance at 665 nm before acidification
Ea665 = absorbance at 665 nm after acidification
v = volume of solvent used for the extraction (mℓ)
V = volume of the sample filtered (ℓ)
l = path of spectrophotometer cuvette (cm)
Phytoplankton community composition
Water samples (500 mℓ) for phytoplankton enumeration and identification were collected at the surface (0 m) and at depths of 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0 m, and were preserved with 1.5 mℓ of 1% (v/v) glutaraldehyde until counts were ready to be done. Eight drops of Rose Bengal were added to 60 mℓ of the preserved samples and the samples were put into Utermohl settling chambers and allowed to settle for 24 h. Counts and identification of microalgal groups (i.e. flagellates, dinoflagellates, diatoms, cyanophytes and chlorophytes) were performed using the Zeiss IM 35 inverted microscope at 630x magnification. The number of phytoplankton cells from the field of view was calculated according to a formula by Snow (2007).
Benthic microalgal biomass (chlorophyll a)
Four replicate intertidal and subtidal benthic samples were collected from each site. Intertidal samples from the uppermost 2 sites of the estuary were not collected due to the steepness of the banks. The surface sediment (<2 mm depth and 20 mm pre-marked area) was scraped just above the water level at low tide for intertidal samples. Subtidal samples were collected from each site using a 20 mm internal diameter corer attached to an extension pole and the top 1 cm sediment was scraped from the core. The samples were stored in vials in the 'cooler box' (portable ice chest) until they could be frozen. The samples were freeze-dried and 4 mℓ of 95% ethanol (Merck 4111) was added to approximately 0.2 g then stored for 24 h at 0°C. After the chlorophyll a extraction, the samples were filtered through Whatman GF/C filters and the extracts were analysed before and after the addition of 2 drops of 0.1 N HCl, using a spectro-photometer at 665 nm according to Nusch (1980).
For the short-term study only subtidal benthic biomass was measured as the objective of this study was to investigate the deposition of water column microalgae.
Benthic diatom composition
Benthic samples were collected according to methods described by Round (1981) and Bate et al. (2004). The samples were digested using 10 mℓ of saturated KMnO4 and 10 mℓ of 10 M HCl were added. Processed samples were stored in 2 mℓ Eppendorf safe-lock tubes until mounting. Permanent light microscopy slides were made with the digested diatom samples. NaphraxTM was used as a mounting agent and 2 drops were used. Diatom frustules were examined and counted using a Zeiss Axioplan light microscope with Differential Interference Contrast (DIC) optics. Using a television camera (The Imaging Source DFK 41F02), images of the dominant species were visualised using the Imaplan V 2.06 image analysis programme (IMATEC Elektronische Bildanalysesysteme GmbH ©2004). Diatom valves were counted in each sample using 1 000x magnification until the obvious dominant was established. In most cases this represented approximately 200 frustules. At least 1 digital image of every taxon was captured. The dominants were those species that were clearly present in the greatest number and the sub-dominants were those that had a frequency >10% but not dominant.
Benthic algal community composition
For the short-term study the entire benthic community was counted and identified. Sediment samples (surface 1 mm) were collected using a 20 mm internal diameter corer and placed in a 50 mℓ vial with about 20-25 mℓ unfiltered estuarine water in the field. The sampling method does combine surface sediment and unfiltered water from above the sediment core so samples represent a mix of benthic and pelagic taxa. Samples were preserved with 1.5 mℓ of 1% (v/v) glutaraldehyde solution in the field and stored at 5°C in a darkened environment. For enumeration purposes, samples were re-suspended and stained with Rose Bengal. The stained samples were allowed to stain for 24 h. A drop was placed on slides with coverslips on top then identified under a light microscope at 400x magnification. Counts and identification of microalgal groups (i.e. flagellates, dinoflagellates, diatoms, cyanophytes and chlorophytes) were performed using the Zeiss IM 35 inverted microscope at 630x magnification. Relative abundances of the different groups were reported.
Data analysis
All statistical analyses were completed using the MINITAB Version 15 (Minitab, Inc.) statistical package. The data collected (Table 1) were categorised as follows: algal counts, biomass and physico-chemical from February 2008 to August 2008; algal and physico-chemical data for 5 weeks in 2008. The data (phytoplankton counts) from 2006 to 2007 represented means and were excluded from the current analysis, but were used for long-term comparisons. Data for each sampling trip were analysed and comparisons were also made for all trips combined.
All data were tested for normality using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for normality. The null hypothesis of normality was rejected for most response variables and a Johnson transformation was performed to normalise such data. The Johnson transformation applies to a broader range of data types than the alternative Box-Cox transformation. It is equally robust for data sets with negative values and selects an appropriate transformation function for each data set because of its wider range of transformation functions (Farnum, 1996; Chou et al., 1998). The maximμM p-value for selection of an appropriate bounded (SB), lognormal (SL) or unbounded (SU) transformation distribution was 0.10.
Levene's test for homogeneity of variance, with a confidence interval of 95%, was used to test the equality of variance across variables. Following a positive test, a general linear model (GLM) analysis of variance (without interactions) was conducted on the transformed data to test the effect of the different predictors (distance from estuary mouth, sampling time and depth) on the response variables at a = 0.05 (although transformed data were used in the analyses, for purposes of clarity, means and standard errors of the actual untransformed data are presented in some of the results). Pearson product moment correlation was performed to test the relationship between variables. Contour plots for chlorophyll a and phy-toplankton cell counts were produced using Grapher (Golden software) Version 8. Contour XY Data Map was used for the plots. Different scales were used for the ;y-axis for different sampling dates so that the patterns were visible. In some cases, very high values were recorded but only for a single sampling date. Mean values are expressed as mean ± standard error of the mean.
Long-term study
Water quality variables
Flows of 7.5 and 7.4 m3s-1 were recorded at Department of Water Affairs (DWA) Station N4H005 on 4 and 5 August 2006 (Fig. 2). These high flows occurred prior to the 17 August 2006 sampling session as a result of rainfall (128 mm and 64 mm on 2 and 3 August 2006, respectively). The highest mean monthly flow of 1.29 m3s-1 also occurred in August 2006. For the other sampling sessions flow was less than 0.15 m3s-1 (Fig. 2). Data from the environmental water requirements study on the Sundays Estuary (Taljaard et al., 2008) was also used to identify the flow into the estuary at the time of sampling, based on the plots of the salinity gradient. The estuary in August 2006 was in a freshwater-dominated state which is characterised by flow greater than 15 m3s-1. In March 2007, and February, June and August 2008, a freshwater front was present in the upper and middle reaches. This was classified as a small transition state where flow is between 0.5 to 2 m3s-1 (Taljaard et al., 2008).
Both vertical and horizontal salinity gradients were observed during all sampling trips. Salinity, expressed in practical salinity units (PSU), was highest at the mouth (15 ± 0.1 to 28.2 ± 0 across the study period from 2006 to 2008) and decreased towards the head of the estuary and with depth (0.6 to 1.6 at 22 km from the mouth) (Fig. 3a - e). Vertically averaged salinity of less than 10 PSU occurred from 12.5 km upstream of the mouth, and this was the region where the highest water colμMn chlorophyll a was found (Fig. 4a - e). Freshwater intrusion (salinity <5) occurred up to 8 km and 13 km from the mouth in August 2006 and March 2007, respectively. In 2008 freshwater intrusion was evident at 11 to 12.5 km from the mouth. Salinity differed significantly with time (df = 4; F = 13.47; p <0.05; R2 = 84.3%). Salinity in June 2008 (16.7 ± 1.7) was significantly higher than August 2006 and March 2007 (7.7 ± 2.3 and 12.2 ± 2.6, respectively).
Generally, there was a decrease in temperature from the lower reaches to the upper reaches of the estuary (Fig. 3f - j). There was a significant difference in the overall mean temperature during the different sampling periods (df = 4; F = 167.88; p <0.05; R2 = 81.4%), where August 2006 was lower than the rest of the trips and February 2008 had the highest temperature. Temperature varied significantly with distance from the mouth of the estuary (df = 19; F = 0. 37; p <0.05; R2 = 50.3%).
Average dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN) at each site ranged from 0.1 μM to 134.6 μM during the 2007 and 2008 sampling sessions, typically increasing with distance from the mouth of the estuary. Dissolved inorganic phosphorus (DIP) also increased with distance from the mouth and ranged from below detectable limits to 8.8 μM. The DIN:DIP ratio was <16 in 2008, which suggests that microalgal growth was N-limited, but this was only likely in February 2008 when DIN concentrations as low as 0.1 μM were measured.
Phytoplankton biomass (chlorophyll a)
Water colμMn chlorophyll a (Fig. 4a- e) was significantly different (df = 4; F = 2.76; p <0.05, R2 = 9.4 %) for the different sampling trips (February 2008 to August 2008). Chlorophyll a was significantly higher in March 2007 and August 2008 (31.5 ± 12.6 and 24.08 ± 5.56 μg.ℓ1) than in August 2006 and June 2008 (14.15 ± 1.45 and 8.16 ± 4.37 μg.ℓ-1). Chlorophyll a was always higher in low-salinity water and decreased with water depth (r = -0.53 and -0.27 respectively; p <0.05, n = 75).
Phytoplankton community composition and distribution
For this study phytoplankton groups with a relative abundance greater than 10% of the total algal count were considered to be dominant. Phytoplankton community composition is presented in Figs. 4f - j. The following phytoplankton groups were identified: flagellates, diatoms, dinoflagellates, chlorophytes (green algae) and cyanophytes (blue-green algae). For the purposes of this study, organisms that were considered to be flagellates have 1 or more flagella and do not fall within the phytoplankton groups already mentioned. The group 'other' included planktonic organisms (mostly zooplankton, e.g. ciliates) not belonging to the above-mentioned groups.
During all sampling trips the highest phytoplankton cell density occurred from 12.5 km to 21.9 km from the mouth. Different groups of microalgae formed phytoplankton blooms (defined as chlorophyll a greater than 20 μg.ℓ-1) during the different sampling trips (Figs. 4f - j). These included blooms of green algae (August 2006), flagellates (March 2007), dinoflagellates (June 2008) and diatom species (February and August 2008).
In August 2006 green algae were dominant at 0.2 km from the mouth of the estuary with mean cell numbers of 9 042 cellsm.ℓ-1 and making up 64% of the composition (Fig. 4f). The dominant green alga, Diogenes, are freshwater alga (Prescott, 1970). Flagellates were dominant from 4.1 km and towards the head of the estuary (8 449 to 9 319 cellsm.ℓ-1).
An opposite trend was observed in March 2007 where green algae were dominant (5 741 cells mℓ-1 to 41 804 cells.mℓ-1) towards the head of the estuary (Fig. 4g). By contrast flagellate density decreased from the mouth to the head of the estuary (from 31 324 to 3 400 cells.mℓ-1). A freshwater flagellate from the genus Chlamydomonas (Prescott, 1970) was dominant in the lower reaches.
In February 2008 a diatom bloom of Cyclotella atomus Hustedt was present in the upper reaches of the estuary with 11 028 ± 40 (± SE) and 55 738 ± 0 cells.mℓ-1 at 16.3 and 21.9 km from the mouth (Fig. 4h), respectively, contributing to the high chlorophyll a (34.4 ± 0.9 μg.ℓ-1 and 73.6 ± 3.3 μg.ℓ-1 respectively) found at these sites (Fig. 4c). This group respectively contributed 26% and 57% to the total community composition at these sites. Diatom blooms also occurred in August 2008 (Fig. 4j) and the bloom species were identified as C.atomus Hustedt, Cyclostephanus dubius (Fricke) Round and Stephanodiscus Hantzshia Grunow. At sites 9.9, 12.5, 16.3 and 21.9 km from the mouth diatom cell densities of 12 502 ± 3 460 cells.mℓ-1, 66 886 ± 0 cells.mℓ-1, 58 525 ± 2 787 cells.mℓ-1 and 35 885 ± 1 742 cells.mℓ-1 were recorded, respectively. Diatoms contributed 53, 74, 63 and 47% to the total phytoplankton composition at the mentioned sites, respectively.
Phytoplankton chlorophyll a peaked 12.5 km from the mouth in June 2008 (Fig. 4d) and was associated with a dense unidentified dinoflagellate bloom (11 705 ± 7 246 cells.mℓ-1) with relative abundance of 88% (Fig. 4i). Dinoflagellate density was still relatively high upstream of the bloom site (3 583 ± 1 407 cells.mℓ-1 at 16.3 km from the mouth).
Benthic microalgal biomass (chlorophyll a)
During the sampling trips (February, June and August 2008), benthic microalgal samples from the intertidal areas were not collected at sites 16.3 and 21.9 km from the mouth due to the channel-like morphology of the estuary and the presence of dense reed beds. Mean subtidal benthic chlorophyll a was significantly different at each sampling site (df = 6; p <0.05) during each trip (F = 3.44, 6.43 and 7.14; R2 = 35.8, 54.7 and 57.7% for February, June and August 2008 respectively). Intertidal benthic chlorophyll a was also found to be significantly different (df = 4; p <0.05) for all sampling trips (F = 13.59, 16.29 and 4.47; R2 = 72.6, 76.3 and 42.2% for February, June and August 2008, respectively). Benthic chlorophyll a at 12.5 km from the mouth was significantly higher than at other sites during most of the sampling trips (Tables 2 and 3). Maximum phytoplankton biomass was always found at the sites where the highest benthic microalgal biomass was recorded.
Short-term study Nutrients
During the short-term study (13 March - 9 April 2009), DIN ranged from 21.4 μM to 179.1 μM and typically increased with distance from the mouth of the estuary. Dissolved inorganic phosphorus increased with distance from the estuary mouth but concentrations were particularly low, ranging from 0.2 μM to 1.5 μM. The low DIP concentrations relative to DIN resulted in high DIN:DIP values (>34), suggesting that microalgal growth was P-limited during this period.
Phytoplankton biomass (chlorophyll a)
Chlorophyll a concentrations were significantly different (df = 4; F = 5.52; p <0.05; R2 = 52.5%) for the different weeks.
Chlorophyll a concentrations in Weeks 1, 4 and 5 (21 ± 3.8; 30 ± 7.2 and 17 ± 4.1 μg.ℓ -1) were significantly higher than in Weeks 2 and 3 (9.4 ± 1.5 and 11.7 ± 1.1 μg.ℓ -1). There was a strong cold front (17 to 24°C) from 17 to 19 March 2009 which mixed the water colμMn, resulting in a decrease in chlorophyll a (<20 μg.ℓ -1). The highest chlorophyll a biomass (>20 μg.ℓ -1) occurred in the middle to upper reaches of the estuary during Weeks 1, 4 and 5 (Fig. 5a - e).
Phytoplankton size-fractionated chlorophyll a
One-way ANOVA showed that the size fractions of chlorophyll a differed significantly (p <0.05) within the sampling trips. The nanoplankton size fraction was significantly higher during each week than the other 2 size fractions and contributed between 55 and 79% to the phytoplankton biomass (Table 4).
Benthic microalgal biomass (chlorophyll a)
Subtidal benthic chlorophyll a increased from the mouth towards the upper reaches of the estuary (Fig. 6), following the pattern of the water column biomass (Fig. 7). There was a peak in the water column chlorophyll a in Weeks 4 and 5 at 12.5 km from the mouth, which can also be seen in the subtidal benthic biomass. Benthic and water column chlorophyll a were not collected in the same manner so, in order to determine if high benthic chlorophyll a concentrations were caused by water column chlorophyll a, average values per site were used. Benthic and water column microalgal biomass from Weeks 4 and 5 were positively correlated (r = 0.92 and 0.95 respectively; p <0.05; n = 5). The highest subtidal benthic biomass occurred in the same region of the estuary where water column chlorophyll a concentrations were high.
Benthic algal community composition
The patterns of species composition for the benthos and water column were similar to one another during all weeks, possibly indicating deposition of cells from the water column to the benthos (Fig. 8a - e and Fig. 5f - j). In Weeks 1 and 2 flagellates were dominant in the lower to upper reaches whereas diatoms became dominant in the upper reaches. This pattern was also observed for the phytoplankton composition in the same week. Flagellates were dominant in the water column throughout the estuary in Week 3. They were also present in the benthos but not as dominant as the flagellates in the water column (29 - 74% dominance). During Week 4 the benthic diatoms at 16.3 km from the mouth constituted 99% of the composition, similarly to water column diatoms (88%). In Week 5 flagellates dominated the benthos throughout the estuary, as well as the water column, except at 8 and 9.9 km from the mouth. No significant correlations were found when comparing relative abundances of microalgal groups from the benthos and water column (flagellates, dinoflagellates, other plankton) for all the weeks and sites. However, diatom relative abundance was significantly correlated between water column and sediment surface (r =0.50; p <0.05; n = 25).
Long-term study
The objectives of this study were to determine the microalgal biomass and community composition in the Sundays Estuary. Results show a unique case where the chlorophyll a blooms in the estuary consist of multiple microalgal groups. High chlorophyll a concentrations (>20 μgℓ-1) in the shallow upper reaches of the Sundays Estuary have previously been found where nitrate concentrations were greater than 14 μM, water residence time was 6 - 7 tidal cycles and where there was marked salinity stratification (Hilmer and Bate, 1991; Adams and Bate, 1999; Scharler, 2000). Scharler (2000) recorded a bloom in the middle and upper reaches of the Sundays Estuary and recorded a mean chlorophyll biomass of 22 μgℓ-1 at nitrate concentrations of 33 μM in the upper reaches. Similarly, in the Great Fish Estuary consistent freshwater inflow carrying a high nutrient load supported high (>20 μgℓ-1) phytoplankton biomass (Allanson and Read, 1995). High (>20 μgℓ-1) chlorophyll a levels are a persistent feature in the upper reaches of the Sundays Estuary. This has been found to be the most productive region, which was also evident in this study, and the occurrence of phytoplankton blooms indicated nutrient uptake from the water column. Water residence time is important and allows for phytoplankton bio-mass to increase (Adams and Bate, 1994; Gameiro and Brotas, 2010). However, residence time is not easy to measure, which is a problem since realistic simulation of phytoplankton populations depends on accurate interpretations of mixing processes in estuaries (Cloern, 1991).
Hilmer (1990) explained the distribution of phytoplankton chlorophyll a in connection with the hydrodynamic features of the estuary. In the lower reaches of the estuary the biomass was lower because the bathymetry is uneven and deep and promotes turbulent mixing. As a result, phytoplankton experience rapid changes in salinity and flushing time (1 to 2 tidal cycles), which would result in death and rapid flushing out to sea (Hilmer, 1990). The middle and upper reaches of the estuary are shallower and have longer residence time and semi-closed circulation occurs (Jerling, 1994; MacKay, 1988). These findings correspond with the findings of the current study.
This study showed that in the Sundays Estuary blooms could consist of dinoflagellates, diatoms, green algae and flagellates. Under low to medium flow conditions, indicated by salinity profiles, diatoms and dinoflagellates were dominant, whereas under high flow conditions flagellates and green algae occurred. A flood occurred in the Eastern Cape region on the 2 August 2006 and sampling took place on 17 August. This event accounted for the dominance of the freshwater flagellates at the head of the estuary and the decreasing gradient in cell density towards the mouth. A freshwater flagellate (Chlamydomonas sp.) was the dominant phytoplankton species in March 2007. Only during this sampling session was the chlorophyll a maximμM (145.2 and 237.4 μgℓ-1 at 0.2 and 4.1 km respectively) found in the lower reaches of the estuary. High rainfall (38 to 40 mm) that occurred before sampling (4 and 5 of March), and an increase in flow, most likely transported the flagellate to the lower reaches of the estuary. The diatom cell numbers ranged between 11 028 and 66 886 cells.mℓ-1 in the middle to upper reaches of the estuary during the February and August 2008 sampling trips. Jerling and Wooldridge (1995) also recorded a bloom (13 000 cells.mℓ-1) of centric diatoms in the middle and upper reaches of the Sundays Estuary after a flood in November 1989.
Past studies have shown that dinoflagellates form dense blooms during neap tides when strong vertical salinity stratification has developed; the difference in surface and bottom water salinity is greater than 5 (Margalef, 1978; Hilmer and Bate, 1991). In this study a dinoflagellate bloom (18 951 cells.mℓ-1) occurred in June 2008 in the surface waters at 12.5 km from the mouth. The dinoflagellate bloom contributed to the high chlorophyll a biomass (99.5 μgℓ-1) and this was supported by a strong positive correlation between dinoflagellate cell numbers with chlorophyll a (r = 0.97; p <0.05; n = 25).
The highest benthic microalgal biomass found in the present study was located 12.5 km from the mouth during all sampling trips. This site was turbid, the intertidal area consisting of compacted clay, whereas the subtidal sediment was sandy and the water column was strongly stratified. It is possible that the deposition of phytoplankton cells in this area contributed to high benthic chlorophyll a. Furthermore, low flows possibly resulted in increased sediment stability which in turn supported high benthic microalgal biomass. A study in the Gamtoos Estuary showed similar results in that flows of less than 1 m3s-1 resulted in the development of epipelic diatom biofilms and, subsequently, high microphytobenthos biomass (Snow, 2007). Sandy silts and exposed habitats usually support a lower microalgal biomass than sheltered sites that are dominated by fine cohesive sediment (MacIntyre et al., 1996; Underwood and Kromkamp, 1999). The results of the current study were also similar to findings in the Kwelera Estuary where the distribution of microphytobenthic biomass was found to be strongly influenced by position along the longitudinal gradient (Walker, 2003). Adams and Bate (1994) also found that the chlorophyll a concentrations were highest in the middle reaches of the Swartkops Estuary compared to the mouth and upper reaches. Deductions from Walker (2003) were that the more turbulent hydrological conditions, together with loose sediment in the mouth area, did not support microphytob-enthos biomass, and low levels were consistently found in the sandy sediments near the mouth, whereas higher concentrations were found in muddier sites during the current study. Furthermore, during this study, cattle and benthic cyanobacterial mats were observed in the intertidal zone at 12.5 km from the mouth, which could have also contributed to the high benthic chlorophyll a levels at this site.
Short-term study
The short-term study was conducted in order to determine the short-term variability of phytoplankton composition and biomass in response to physical, chemical and climatic factors. Carstensen et al. (2004) stated that blooms develop from the active growth of phytoplankton populations, which must be accompanied by the input of new nutrients to the surface water. For this study on the Sundays Estuary high chlorophyll a was mainly associated with flagellates and diatoms, and the diatom species Cyclotella atomus, Cyclostephanus dubius and Cylindrotheca closterium made up most of the diatom blooms observed in the middle to upper reaches of the estuary. The dominant diatom species found during the short-term study corresponded with previously reported bloom species that have been identified for the Sundays Estuary in 2008 (long-term study) and similar to the findings of Jerling and Wooldridge (1995) on the centric diatom bloom in the middle and upper reaches. Cylindrotheca closterium blooms occurred on 13 March 2009 at 8 and 9.9 km from the mouth. This species has never been recorded in blooms in the Sundays Estuary before. Diatoms have been shown to be the most favourable phyto-plankton group in well-mixed, nutrient-rich waters (Margalef, 1978; Lassen et al., 2004; Domingues et al., 2005).
Although phytoplankton succession was not strongly exhibited in this study, diatoms and flagellates were the most abundant groups, succeeding each other in terms of dominance. Diatom blooms were mostly found in the middle to upper reaches whereas flagellates were found in the estuary at all times, and along the entire length of the estuary.
Nanoplankton contributed on average 55 - 79% to the total phytoplankton biomass in the weeks sampled. Results from this study are also supported by the findings of Revelante and Gilmartin (1978), Lassen et al. (2004) and Verity and Borkman (2010), in which nanophytoplankton were found to be the dominant size class in estuaries. Nanoplankton have also been found to be dominant in South African temporarily open/closed estuaries (Froneman, 2000; Thomas et al., 2005). They are able to out-compete larger species for nutrients and light because of their small size and large surface to volμMe ratio (van den Hoek et al., 1995). Nanophytoplankton are able to propel themselves to zones of greater light intensity and can therefore achieve much higher biomass than microphytoplankton because of their competitive advantage during periods of decreased light (Thomas et al., 2005).
Grange et al. (2000) indicated that the continuous inflow of freshwater in permanently open estuaries ensures that the phytoplankton size structure remains constant throughout the season. Phytoplankton size structure in the Sundays Estuary throughout the sampling sessions was consistently maintained and dominated by the nanoplankton size group. In contrast, the size structure of the phytoplankton community is highly variable in temporarily open/closed estuaries due to the sporadic inflow of freshwater. For instance, in the Kasouga Estuary nano- and microphytoplankton were dominant when the mouth was open, but during the closed mouth phase picophytoplank-ton were dominant (Froneman, 2002).
Results from the long-term study were also supported by the findings from the short-term study. During the 2 studies phytoplankton blooms (>20 μgℓ-1) were recorded 8 km upstream of the mouth. High benthic biomass was found in the same area of the estuary where high water column chlorophyll a occurred. The short-term study also showed that the patterns of phytoplankton and benthic species composition were similar for specific sites. The sampling method does combine surface sediment with water collected from above the core, to capture any flocculated material, so it is likely that the micro-algae are a combination of the benthic and pelagic communities. Dinoflagellates and flagellates were present in the benthic samples, which are typical water column species that depend on flagella for movement (Tomas, 1997).
From the 5-week sampling period in 2009 no single factor could be identified as the driver or trigger of phytoplank-ton blooms. However, it was shown that diatoms occurred in blooms during warm, calm conditions, whereas wind-mixing and reduced temperature (due to the cold front) promoted the dominance of flagellates throughout the estuary and they were present at all times. Both DIN and DIP generally increased with distance from the mouth of the estuary but DIP possibly limited microalgal growth based on the high DIN:DIP ratios, particularly in the lower reaches. It is likely that flow supported high phyto-plankton chlorophyll a in the middle reaches of the estuary but as DIP decreased towards the mouth of the estuary, being taken up by phytoplankton, a threshold DIP concentration was reached and chlorophyll a was generally lowest in the lower reaches. Nutrients were evenly distributed on 26 March 2009 and DIP was <1.0 μM, possibly limiting the growth of phytoplankton.
This study has contributed to an understanding of microalgal responses in a nutrient-rich permanently open estuary. The results from this study were used to provide specialist input on the microalgal component for the determination of the ecological water requirements for the Sundays Estuary. This study showed that water column chlorophyll a was frequently >20 μg.ℓ-1, and phytoplankton density often > 10 000 cells.mℓ-1, indicative of an extremely productive estuary.
The consistently high nutrient-rich river flow keeps the build up of organic material low so hypoxic and anoxic events do not occur often. However, a reduction in river flow and the subsequent build up of sand in the mouth area are likely to increase the residence time of water in the estuary and lead to more frequent symptoms of eutrophication; i.e. anoxia associated with dense phytoplankton blooms. If phosphorus was better managed in the catchment of the Sundays River, it is likely that the frequency of phytoplankton blooms and the risks associated with eutrophication could be reduced. Records of long-term datasets need to be kept so that the range of the natural variation between and within estuaries on a seasonal and interannual basis can be established. By doing so, the different types of estuaries can be better understood and efficiently managed. For the current study, difficulties were experienced in terms of using raw data from studies previously completed on the Sundays Estuary for comparison purposes.
Funding for this study was obtained from NMMU, Vodacom and the National Research Foundation (NRF). Thanks are due to the NMMU Department of Botany for providing facilities and equipment, Mrs Patricia Smailes for assisting with the taxonomic identification of the diatoms and Mr Pascal Tabot for assisting with the statistical analyses.
ADAMS JB and BATE GC (1994) The freshwater requirements of estuarine plants incorporating the development of an estuarine decision support system. WRC Report No. 292/1/94. Water Research Commission, Pretoria. [ Links ]
ADAMS JB and BATE GC (1999) Primary producers. Estuarine microalgae. In: Allanson BR and Baird D (eds.) Estuaries of South Africa. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 91-101. [ Links ]
ADAMS JB, WOOLDRIDGE T, COWLEY P, SNOW GC, STRYDOM N, TALJAARD S, VAN NIEKERK L, WHITFIELD AK and WHITTINGTON P (2008) Ecological Water Requirements study, Intermediate level, Sundays Estuary. Report prepared for SANParks by the IECM of the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University. IECM Report No. C151.1. 115 pp. excl. appendices. [ Links ]
ALLANSON BR and READ GHL (1995) Further comment on the response of Eastern Cape Province estuaries to variable freshwater inflows. S. Afr. J. Aquat. Sci. 21 56-70. [ Links ]
ANANDRAJ A, PERISSINOTTO R, NOZAIS C and STRETCH D (2008) The recovery of microalgal production and biomass in a South African temporarily open/closed estuary, following mouth breaching. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 79 599-606. [ Links ]
ARCHIBALD REM (1981) An Investigation into the Taxonomy of the Diatoms Bacillariophyta of the Sundays and Great Fish Rivers with Ecological Observations in Sundays. Ph.D. Thesis, Rhodes University, Grahamstown. [ Links ]
BATE GC, SMAILES PA and ADAMS JB (2004) Benthic diatoms in the rivers and estuaries of South Africa. WRC Report No. TT 234/04. Water Research Commission, Pretoria. 32 pp. [ Links ]
CARSTENSEN J, CONLEY DJ and HENRIKSEN P (2004) Frequency, composition, and causes of summer phytoplankton blooms in a shallow coastal ecosystem, the Kattegat. Limnol. Oceanogr. 49 (1) 190-201. [ Links ]
CHOU Y, POLANSKY AM and MASON RL (1998) Transforming nonnormal data to normality in statistical process control. J. Qual. Technol. 30 133-141. [ Links ]
CLOERN JE (1991) Tidal stirring and phytoplankton bloom dynamics in an estuary. J. Mar. Res. 49 203-221. [ Links ]
COUNCIL FOR SCIENTIFIC AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH (CSIR) (2002) Analytical Methods Manual. Estuarine and marine waters, sediment and biological tissue. CSIR Technical Report ENV/S-I 97011. CSIR, Stellenbosch, South Africa. 133 pp. [ Links ]
DOMINGUES RB, BARBOSA A and GALVÁO H (2005) Nutrients, light and phytoplankton succession in a temperate estuary (the Guadiana, south-western Iberia). Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 64 249-260. [ Links ]
FARNμM NR (1996) Using Johnson Curves to describe non-normal process data. Qual. Eng. 9 329-336.
FRONEMAN PW (2000) Feeding studies on selected zooplankton in a temperate estuary, South Africa. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 51 543-552. [ Links ]
FRONEMAN PW (2002) Response of the plankton to three different hydrological phases of the temporarily open/closed Kasouga Estuary, South Africa. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 55 535-546. [ Links ]
FRONEMAN PW (2006) The importance of phytoplankton size in mediating trophic interactions within the plankton of a southern African estuary. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 70 693-700. [ Links ]
GAMA PT, ADAMS JB, SCHAEL DM and SKINNER T (2005) Phytoplankton chlorophyll a concentration and community structure of two temporarily open/closed estuaries. WRC Report No. 1255/1/05. Water Research Commission, Pretoria. 91 pp. [ Links ]
GAMEIRO C and BROTAS V (2010) Patterns of phytoplankton variability in the Tagus Estuary (Portugal). Estuar. Coasts 33 311-323. [ Links ]
GRANGE N, WHITFIELD AK, DE VILLIERS CJ and ALLANSON BR (2000) The response of two South African east coast estuaries to altered river flow regimes. Aquat. Conserv.: Mar. Freshwater Ecosyst. 10 155-17. [ Links ]
HILMER T (1990) Factors Influencing the Estimation of Primary Productivity in Small Estuaries. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Port Elizabeth. 154 pp. [ Links ]
HILMER T and BATE GC (1991) Vertical migration of a flagellate-dominated bloom in a shallow South African estuary. Bot. Mar. 34 113-121. [ Links ]
JERLING HL (1994) Feeding Ecology of Mesozooplankton in the Sundays River Estuary. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Zoology, University of Port Elizabeth, Port Elizabeth. [ Links ]
JERLING HL and WOOLDRIDGE TH (1995) Relatively negative δ13C ratios of mesozooplankton in the Sundays River estuary, comments on potential carbon sources. S. Afr. J. Aquat. Sci. 21 71-77. [ Links ]
KIBIRIGE I and PERISSINOTTO R (2003) In situ feeding rates and grazing impact of zooplankton in a South African temporarily open estuary. Mar. Biol. 142 357-367. [ Links ]
LASSEN M.F, BRAMM ME, RICHARDSON K, YUSOFF F and SHARIFF M (2004) Phytoplankton community composition and size distribution in the Langat River Estuary, Malaysia. Estuaries 27 (4) 716-727. [ Links ]
LUCAS LV, KOSEFF JR, MONISMITH SG, CLOERN JE and THOMPSON JK (1999) Process governing phytoplankton blooms in estuaries. II: The role of horizontal transport. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 187 17-30. [ Links ]
MACINTYRE HL, GEIDER RJ and MILLER DC (1996) Micro- phytobenthos: The ecological role of the "Secret Garden" of unveg-etated, shallow-water marine habitats. I. Distribution, abundance and primary production. Estuaries 19 (2A) 186-201. [ Links ]
MACKAY HM (1988) Water Structures and Circulation in the Sundays River Estuary. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Port Elizabeth, Port Elizabeth. 214 pp. [ Links ]
MACKAY HM and SCHμMANN EH (1990) Mixing and circulation in the Sundays River Estuary, South Africa. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 31 203-216. [ Links ]
MARGALEF R (1978) Life-forms of phytoplankton as survival alternatives in an unstable environment. Oceanologica Acta 1 493-509. [ Links ]
NINHAM SHAND (2008) A Hydrological Study of the Sundays River Estuary. WRC Report No. K8/780/2. Water Research Commission, Pretoria. 7 pp. [ Links ]
NOZAIS C, PERISSINOTTO R and TITA G (2005) Seasonal dynamics of meiofauna in a South African temporarily open/closed estuary (Mdloti Estuary, Indian Ocean). Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 62 325-338. [ Links ]
NUSCH EA (1980) Comparison of different methods for chlorophyll and phaeopigment determination. Archiv fur Hydrobiologie, Beiheft Ergebnise der Limnologie 14 14-36. [ Links ]
PAERL HW, VALDES LM, ADOLF JE and HARDING Jr. LW (2006) Anthropogenic and climatic influences on the eutrophication of large estuarine ecosystems. Limnol. Oceanogr. 51 448-462. [ Links ]
PERISSINOTTO R, IYER K and NOZAIS C (2006) Response of microphytobenthos to flow and trophic variation in two South African temporarily open/closed estuaries. Bot. Mar. 49 10-22. [ Links ]
PRESCOTT GW (1970) How to know: The Freshwater Algae. Wm. C. Brown Company Publishers, Dubuque. Lowa. 348 pp. [ Links ]
REDDERING JSV and ESTERHUYSEN K (1981) Sedimentation in the Sundays Estuary. Rosie Report No. 3. Department of Geology. University of Port Elizabeth. [ Links ]
REVELANTE N and GILMARTIN M (1978) Characteristics of microplankton and nanoplankton communities of an Australian coastal plain estuary. Aust. J. Mar. Freshwater Res. 29 9-18. [ Links ]
ROUND FE (1981) The Ecology of Algae. Cambridge University Press, London. 653 pp. [ Links ]
SCHARLER UM (2000) Response of Nutrient Status and Biotic Communities to Variable Freshwater Input Regimes in Eastern Cape Estuaries, South Africa, Including a Network of Analysis Approach. Ph.D. thesis, University of Port Elizabeth, Port Elizabeth. South Africa. 269 pp. [ Links ]
SNOW GC (2007) Contributions to the Use of Microalgae in Estuarine Freshwater Reserve Determinations. PhD thesis. Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University. South Africa. 249 pp. [ Links ]
SÜNDBACK K, MILES A, HULTH S, PIHL L, ENGSTROM P, SELANDER E and SVENSON A (2003) Importance of benthic nutrient regeneration during initiation of macroalgal blooms in shallow bays. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 246 115-126. [ Links ]
SÚNDBACK K, LINARES F, LARSON F and WULFF A (2004) Benthic nitrogen fluxes along a depth gradient in a microtidal fjord: The role of denitrification and microphytobenthos. Limnol. Oceanogr. 49 1095-1107. [ Links ]
TALJAARD S, VAN NIEKERK L and SONO S (2008) Ecological water requirements study: Sundays Estuary. Specialist Report: Hydrodynamics and water quality. Appendix B. CSIR, Stellen-bosch. 40 pp. [ Links ]
THOMAS CM, PERISSINOTTO R and KIBIRIGE I (2005) Phyto-plankton biomass and size structure in two South African eutrophic, temporarily open/closed estuaries. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 65 223-238. [ Links ]
TOMAS CR (ed.) (1997) Identifying Marine Phytoplankton. Florida Marine Research Institute, St. Petersburg. 858 pp. [ Links ]
TURPIE JK, ADAMS JB, JOUBERT A, HARRISON TD, COLLOTY BM, MAREE RC, WHITFIELD AK, WOOLDRIDGE TH, LAMBERTH SJ, TALJAARD S and VAN NIEKERK L (2002) Assessment of the conservation priority status of South African estuaries for use in management and water allocation. Water SA 28 191-206. [ Links ]
UNDERWOOD GJC, PATERSON DM and PARKER RJ (1995) The measurement of microbial carbohydrate exopolymers from intertidal sediments. Limnol. Oceanogr. 40 1243-1253. [ Links ]
UNDERWOOD GJC and KROMKAMP J (1999) Primary production of phytoplankton and microphytobenthos in estuaries. Adv. Ecol. Res. 29 94-155. [ Links ]
VAN DEN HOEK C, MANN DG and JAHNS HM (1995) Algae: An Introduction to Phycology. Cambridge University Press, United K ingdom. 623 pp. [ Links ]
VERITY P and BORKMAN D (2010) A decade of change in the Skidaway River Estuary. III. Plankton. Estuar. Coast. 33 513-540. [ Links ]
WALKER DR (2003) Plant and Algal Distribution in Response to Environmental Variables in Selected Eastern Cape Estuaries. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Port Elizabeth, Port Elizabeth. 176 pp. [ Links ]
WHITFIELD AK, ADAMS JB, BATE GC, BEZUIDENHOUT K, BORNMAN TG, COWLEY PD, FRONEMAN PW, GAMA PT, JAMES NC, MACKENZIE B, RIDDIN T, SNOW GC, STRYDOM NA, TALJAARD S, TERORDE AI, THERON AK, TURPIE JK, VAN NIEKERK L, VORWERK PD and WOOLDRIDGE TH (2008) A multidisciplinary study of a small, temporarily open/ closed South African estuary, with particular emphasis on the influence of mouth state on the ecology of the system. Afr. J. Mar. Sci. 30 453-473. http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/wsa.v38i23 Available on website http://www.wrc.org.za ISSN 0378-4738 (Print) = Water SA Vol. 38 No. 2 April 2012 ISSN 1816-7950 (On-line) = Water SA Vol. 38 No. 2 April 2012 [ Links ]
Received 6 June 2011;
Accepted in revised form 2 April 2012.
* To whom all correspondence should be addressed. imagem aqui +27 41 504-2429; fax: +27 41 583-2317; e-mail: email@example.com


text:
Send us an EnquiryIf you would like more information about our products, get in touch using the form below and we'll get back to you soon.
This enquiry form generates an email which is only stored in our email system so we can reply if needed. Your details are not used for marketing purposes.
Your information will never be shared with any organisation outside of Solufeed.
For our contact details and other important privacy information please read our full privacy statement.
Head Office
Solufeed Ltd
The Depot
Chichester Road
Sidlesham Common
West Sussex
United Kingdom
Tel: 01243 554090
(International: +44 1243 554090)


text:
I could do pretty much anything to pull off the concept and make the idea happen.
But at the same time it is really essential to me to make it as real as possible !
As usual it is all about the context.
We are working on-and-off, on the Awakening project for a while now and the whole idea is to make it "big" but on a budget.
At the moment we are scouting for a suitable after-fall / sci-fi looking location… in the London area..
Yeah I know…
Pretty much every single quirky property in London is already signed by one of the local/international agency and in most cases it costs a fortune to hire.
If we will take into consideration that we will need it for at least three days – one pre-light and two shooting days – we could easily look at a minimum £5K just for the place to shoot!
It is obviously a no-go so we have to improvise and find something as close as possible to the initial idea and then build a set within that space to create the look-and-feel we need.
This comparing to the above scenario could be really cost effective. If somehow we could get directly to for example care taker that will let us in for a couple hundred £££, it would be a win-win situation.
My goal would be to build and light the full set in front of a camera as I want to make it "real"!
Physical set gives you a few important elements.
– First of all you, your team, (and client) will have the complete scene to examine and work with. To frame the shots and find the best angles etc.
– Secondly it provides a solid grip for the models. They can interact with the set/props and act in a convincing way. It is especially important when working with inexperienced models, when it could be a real issue to improvise with hypothetical machinery and surrounding.
– Another very important if not the most important detail is the integrity of the whole illustration. When the set and the models character is well build, composed, lit and then photographed at the same time, no one can question your final piece and you will have a cohesive output.
So what is your option if for some reason (money, time, man power) you cannot build an extensive set or hire suitable location?
The answer to this could be a composite.
And you have a few options to approach that but unfortunately none are ideal.
– The most obvious solution is to photograph the "plates" for composites on the day and then separately shoot props, a few different locations and mix it with the actual scene. Then later in complex post production combine all elements into the illustration.
– You could build a bespoke miniature set and photograph that model with proper macro lenses to match the perspective and depth of field and combine that with your "plates".
– Another way-out is to build the 3D CGI model and then set the digital camera view to match the rendering to your photographs.
All the above scenarios could overcome your initial problems but could easily create a few more in the process.
The most significant is that you would have to fix the frames and composition pretty much in advance. This might be OK for people used to working with a precise brief/storyboard from a client or art director but it leaves a very limited space to improvise with your models on the day.
It is one thing to have a sketch in the hand and another to deal with props and ten models on the day.
But the issue I am talking about here is more philosophical than technical.
It is about justifying the tools for the right work…
To me it feels quite reasonable to use the computer generated imaginary when you are battling a commercial project like Sci-fi photos or a movie about landscapes/machinery/species that never existed, but I don't feel the same about less action packed motion pictures like dramas and love stories.
Take for example the recent two big Blockbusters – Pacific Rim and on the other side – The Great Gatsby.
I am not naive, after a few years in 3D visualisation market I have a good and clear picture what goes into today's productions and that both the above movies will use CGI's to pull off the impossible scenes.
You would expect anything from the first title, but I must say that I was a little surprised and maybe a bit shocked when I saw later how extensive the computer generated imaginary was in The Great Gatsby.
Check the VFX breakdown below:
It is a great piece of hard work of the many people involved, but I can't help that in this case it's a little bit of showing off and I must say it drove me away from the main story while watching. Of course it is just my opinion, my wife for example have no problem with that and says it gave this fairy tale look to the footage.
I could still argue, but what would be the point if it worked for many.
The point of these blog post is that your goal as a creator of the illustration or if some prefer "the artwork" should be to make your "art" as true to your viewer as possible.
It is all about the respect to other people, about the extra effort that not many can handle…
We will try to build our set as complex as possible and we will let you know where and why we have drawn the line between real and illusion.
To Be Continued……
Thanks for checking!
AWAKENING – PART II – Building Your Team
AWAKENING – PART I – Finding Your Anchor Point
AWAKENING – PROLOGUE – Seeing beyond the obvious…
AWAKENING – THE PHOTO-QUEST with AurumLight Team


text:
- Home
- Dancecd
- Little Bitch
Little Bitch
Description: [The Specials] -
feat. Ewan McGregor
Youre body starts to sweat
It shakes with shivers in fright
You go and sleep with your mother
She hates your guts
She knows that you love her
So she holds you tight
All through the night
Until the broad daylight
But when she doesn't come home
You have to sleep alone
Then you wet your bed
And I think that's sad
For a girl of nineteen
It's more than sad it's obscene
And your girlfriend's sweet little seventeen
She's got her layered hair
And her flared jeans
You know what that means
She's just a little pretty
She shares your London flat
She thinks her bloke knows where it's at
Although he stinks
And when it rains you wear your hat
And your plum coloured
P.V.C. wetlook mac
You tie your ginger hair back in a bun
You're the ugliest creature under the sun
And you think it's 'bout time that you died
And I agree
So you decide on suicide
You've tried but you've never
Quite carried it off
You only wanted to die in order to show off
And if you think it's gonna bleed all over me
You're even wronger than you'd normally be
And the only things you want to see are kitsch
The only thing you want to be is rich
Your little pink up-pointed nose begins to twitch
I know, you know, you're just a little bitch
Typed from the lyrics booklet for Dancemania WINTERS Rock Groove
Contributed by James Edge (LockeVanish) <[email protected]>
[Submit an English translation for this song]
See an error in these lyrics? Let us know here!
Animelyrics.com now has an OpenSearch plugin that you can install into your browser (FireFox, Chrome and IE/Edge supported)
My Little Pony Ties
Lyrics copyright to their respective owners or translators. No copyright infringment is intended or implied.
Layout and other content copyright Anime Lyrics dot Com / Anime Globe Productions
This is some text here


text:
Several years ago I came across a fascinating application of graph theory to architecture. It is in the 1983 book Incidence and symmetry in design and architecture, by Jenny A. Baglivo and Jack E. Graver. I don't know if it is well known among experts in the field, but I've never seen it elsewhere. So I thought I'd share it with all of you.
Here's the simplest version of the problem. Suppose you have an grid of beams. The beams are steel and can't stretch, compress, or bend, but they are attached together by pin-joints. In other words, the joints provide no rigidity in the structure. To make the structure rigid you are allowed to add steel cross-beams (which would force a rhombus to be square).
Question. Where should you place the cross-beams, and what is the fewest number needed to stabilize the structure?
For example, consider the structures below. They both have nine cross-beams. Is either one rigid?
It turns out that the one on the left is rigid. In fact, it is over-braced; it can be braced with only eight cross-beams (we can remove the dotted beam shown in the figure below). The one on the right is not rigid, as can be seen below.
I encourage you to read the discussion by Baglivo and Graver, as they do a beautiful job of walking the reader through the problem. Here is a sketch of the argument.
1. In any bracing configuration (rigid or not) all of the vertical bars in a given row are parallel and all of the horizontal bars in a given column are parallel. You can see that in the deformed example on the right.
2. A cross-beam forces a parallelogram to be a square. By (1), if the square is in the ith row and jth column, then all of the vertical bars in the ith row are perpendicular to all of the horizontal bars in the jth column.
3. To have a rigid structure it suffices to show that the vertical bars in any row are perpendicular to the horizontal bars in any column.
4. We can construct a bipartite graph from any bracing structure. In particular, we have vertices representing row numbers and vertices representing column numbers. We draw an edge from the vertex for the ith row to the vertex for the jth column if there is a cross-beam in the ith row and jth column. The graphs for our two structures are shown below.
5. Using property (2) repeatedly we find that if there is a path in the graph from the ith row to the jth column, then the vertical bars in the ith row are perpendicular to the horizontal bars in the jth column.
6. We conclude that property (3) holds (i.e., the structure is rigid) if and only if the bipartite graph is connected.
7. The smallest connected graph is a tree, and the the largest tree in the bipartite graph with vertices has edges.
Thus we have the following theorem.
Theorem. A bracing of an grid is rigid iff the corresponding bipartite graph is connected. Moreover, the rigid bracing has the fewest possible cross-beams iff the bipartite graph is a tree. In this case it has cross-beams.
Returning to our examples, we see that the graph on the left is connected, so that structure is rigid. In fact, we can remove one edge to obtain a tree, so the structure is over-braced. The graph on the right is not connected, so it is not rigid. However, we could add one more bracing to make it rigid (where?).
Again, I encourage you to check out the original source. They go on to discuss the following two related problems, both of which have graph theoretical solutions.
Question. What if we want the structure to be double-braced? That is, we want it to be rigid even if one of the cross-beams happens to fail (they allow cross-beams to form X's in a square).
[You may not be surprised to learn that a tree in the bipartite graph is not sufficient—you need cycles.]
Question. What if the cross-beams are replaced by wires? The wires are not rigid (they can collapse), but they cannot stretch. How do you cross-brace your structure so that it is rigid?
[In this case you need to look at directed graphs.]