Ocean Carbon & Biogeochemistry
Studying marine ecosystems and biogeochemical cycles in the face of environmental change
  • Home
  • About OCB
    • About Us
    • Scientific Breadth
      • Biological Pump
      • Changing Marine Ecosystems
      • Changing Ocean Chemistry
      • Estuarine and Coastal Carbon Fluxes
      • Ocean Carbon Uptake and Storage
      • Ocean Observatories
    • Code of Conduct
    • Get Involved
    • Project Office
    • Scientific Steering Committee
    • OCB committees
      • Ocean-Atmosphere Interaction
      • Ocean Time-series
      • US Biogeochemical-Argo
  • Activities
    • Summer Workshop
    • OCB Webinars
    • Guidelines for OCB Workshops & Activities
    • Topical Workshops
      • CMIP6 Models Workshop
      • Coastal BGS Obs with Fisheries
      • C-saw extreme events workshop
      • Expansion of BGC-Argo and Profiling Floats
      • Fish, fisheries and carbon
      • Future BioGeoSCAPES program
      • GO-BCG Scoping Workshop
      • Lateral Carbon Flux in Tidal Wetlands
      • Leaky Deltas Workshop – Spring 2025
      • Marine CDR Workshop
      • Ocean Nucleic Acids ‘Omics
      • Pathways Connecting Climate Changes to the Deep Ocean
    • Small Group Activities
      • Aquatic Continuum OCB-NACP Focus Group
      • Arctic-COLORS Data Synthesis
      • BECS Benthic Ecosystem and Carbon Synthesis WG
      • Carbon Isotopes in the Ocean Workshop
      • CMIP6 WG
      • Filling the gaps air–sea carbon fluxes WG
      • Fish Carbon WG
      • Meta-eukomics WG
      • mCDR
      • Metaproteomic Intercomparison
      • Mixotrophs & Mixotrophy WG
      • N-Fixation WG
      • Ocean Carbonate System Intercomparison Forum
      • Ocean Carbon Uptake WG
      • OOI BGC sensor WG
      • Operational Phytoplankton Observations WG
      • Phytoplankton Taxonomy WG
    • Other Workshops
    • Science Planning
      • Coastal CARbon Synthesis (CCARS)
      • North Atlantic-Arctic
    • Ocean Acidification PI Meetings
    • Training Activities
      • PACE Hackweek 2025
      • PACE Hackweek 2024
      • PACE Training Activity 2022
  • Science Support
    • Data management and archival
    • Early Career
    • Funding Sources
    • Jobs & Postdocs
    • Meeting List
    • OCB Topical Websites
      • Ocean Fertilization
      • Trace gases
      • US IIOE-2
    • Outreach & Education
    • Promoting your science
    • Student Opportunities
    • OCB Activity Proposal Solicitations
      • Guidelines for OCB Workshops & Activities
    • Travel Support
  • Publications
    • OCB Workshop Reports
    • Science Planning and Policy
    • Newsletter Archive
  • Science Highlights
  • News

Author Archive for mmaheigan – Page 12

What drives decadal changes in the Chesapeake Bay carbonate system?

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Tuesday, May 3rd, 2022 

Understanding decadal changes in the coastal carbonate system (CO2-system) is essential for predicting how the health of these waters is affected by anthropogenic drivers, such as changing atmospheric conditions and terrestrial inputs. However, studies that quantify the relative impacts of these drivers are lacking.

A recent study in Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans identified the primary drivers of acidification in the Chesapeake Bay over the past three decades. The authors used a three-dimensional hydrodynamic-biogeochemistry model to quantify the relative impacts on the Bay CO2-system from increases in atmospheric CO2, temperature, oceanic dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) concentrations, terrestrial loadings of total alkalinity (TA) and DIC, as well as decreases in terrestrial nutrient inputs. Decadal changes in the surface CO2-system in the Chesapeake Bay exhibit large spatial and seasonal variability due to the combination of influences from the land, ocean and atmosphere. In the upper Bay, increased riverine TA and DIC from the Susquehanna River have increased surface pH, with other drivers only contributing to decadal changes that are one to two orders of magnitude smaller. In the mid- and lower Bay, higher atmospheric CO2 concentrations and reduced nutrient loading are the two most critical drivers and have nearly equally reduced surface pH in the summer. These decadal changes in surface pH show significant seasonal variability with the greatest magnitude generally aligning with the spring and summer shellfish production season (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Overall changes in modeled surface pH (ΔpHall) due to all global and terrestrial drivers combined over the past 30 years (i.e., 2015–2019 relative to 1985–1989). ΔpHall includes changes in surface pH due to increased atmospheric CO2, increased atmospheric thermal forcing, increased oceanic dissolved inorganic carbon concentrations, decreased riverine nitrate concentrations, decreased riverine organic nitrogen concentrations, and increased riverine total alkalinity and dissolved inorganic carbon concentrations.

 

These results indicate that a number of global and terrestrial drivers play crucial roles in coastal acidification. The combined effects of the examined drivers suggest that calcifying organisms in coastal surface waters are likely facing faster decreasing rates of pH than those in open ocean ecosystems. Decreases in surface pH associated with nutrient reductions highlight that the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem is returning to a more natural condition, e.g., a condition when anthropogenic nutrient input from the watershed was lower. However, increased atmospheric CO2 is simultaneously accelerating the rate of change in pH, exerting increased stress on estuarine calcifying organisms. For ecosystems such as the Chesapeake Bay where nutrient loading is already being managed, controlling the emissions of anthropogenic CO2 globally becomes increasingly important to decelerate the rate of acidification and to relieve the stress on estuarine calcifying organisms. Future observational and modeling studies are needed to further investigate how the decadal trends in the Chesapeake Bay CO2-system may vary with depth. These efforts will improve our current understanding of long-term change in coastal carbonate systems and their impacts on the shellfish industry.

 

Authors:
Fei Da (Virginia Institute of Marine Science, William & Mary, USA)
Marjorie A. M. Friedrichs (Virginia Institute of Marine Science, William & Mary, USA)
Pierre St-Laurent (Virginia Institute of Marine Science, William & Mary, USA)
Elizabeth H. Shadwick (CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Australia)
Raymond G. Najjar (The Pennsylvania State University, USA)
Kyle E. Hinson (Virginia Institute of Marine Science, William & Mary, USA)

Unmixing deep sea sedimentary records identifies sensitivity of marine calcifying zooplankton to abrupt warming and ocean acidification in the past

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Tuesday, May 3rd, 2022 

Ocean acidification and rising temperatures have led to concerns about how calcifying organisms foundational to marine ecosystems, will be affected in the near future. We often look to analogous abrupt climate change events in Earth’s geologic past to inform our predictions of these future communities. The Paleocene-Eocene thermal maximum (PETM) is an apt analog for modern climate change. The PETM was a global warming and ocean acidification event driven by geologically abrupt changes to the global carbon cycle approximately 56 million years ago. Much of what we know about the PETM is from the study of deep sea sedimentary records and the microfossils within them. However, these records can experience intense sediment mixing—from bottom water currents and burrowing by organisms living along the seafloor—which can blur or distort the primary climate and ecological signals in these paleorecords.

PETM corrected foram graphic - see caption for detail

Figure 1. A) Frequency distribution of single-shell stable carbon isotope (δ13C) values for planktic foraminiferal shells from a deep sea sedimentary PETM record from the equatorial Pacific (n = 548). Note that 50% of shells measured record distinctly PETM values, while 49.5% record distinctly pre-PETM values. B) Comparison of diversity metric (Shannon-H) between the isotopically filtered (i.e., unmixed) and unfiltered (i.e., mixed) planktic foraminiferal assemblages.

A recent study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences used geochemical signatures measured from individual microfossil shells of planktic foraminifera (surface-dwelling marine calcareous zooplankton) to deconvolve the effects of sediment mixing on a deep sea PETM record from the equatorial Pacific. Use of this “isotopic filtering” (unmixing) method revealed that nearly 50% of shells in the PETM interval were reworked contaminants that lived before the global warming event (Figure 1A). The identification and removal of these older shells from fossil census counts drastically changed interpretations of how these organisms responded to the PETM. Prior interpretations assumed that planktic foraminiferal communities living near the equator diversified during the PETM. However, by deconvolving the effects of sediment mixing on the same equatorial deep sea record, researchers found that these communities actually suffered an abrupt decrease in diversity at the onset of the PETM (Figure 1B). This decrease is likely due to several taxa migrating towards the poles to escape the extreme heat of the tropics and lower oxygen conditions found at deeper water depths (i.e., thermocline) during the PETM. Additionally, some taxa may have undergone morphological changes, signaling reduced calcification, in response to extreme acidifying conditions. Today, anthropogenic carbon emission rates are ~10 times faster than the carbon cycling perturbation that triggered the PETM. Although planktic foraminifera and other key zooplankton survived the PETM, these communities suffered at the hands of extreme sea surface temperatures and acidifying waters, and may not be able to cope the rate of environmental changes in our ocean over the coming centuries.

 

Authors:
Brittany N. Hupp (University of Wisconsin-Madison)
D. Clay Kelly (University of Wisconsin-Madison)
John W. Williams (University of Wisconsin-Madison)

How do coccolithophores survive the darkness?

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Friday, April 1st, 2022 

Coccolithophores have survived several major extinction events over geologic time. The most significant was the asteroid impact at the K/T boundary, followed by months of darkness. Additionally, coccolithophores regularly reside in the twilight zone, just beyond the reach of sunlight. A paper recently published in the New Phytologist addresses how these photosynthetic algae can persist and grow, albeit slowly, in darkness using osmotrophy.

The authors discovered that the osmotrophic uptake of certain types of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) can support survival in low light. They completed a 30-day darkness experiment to determine how the concentration of several DOC compounds affects growth. The coccolithophore species Cruciplacolithus neohelis growth rate increased with the increasing concentration of dissolved organic compounds. They also examined the kinetics of short-term uptake of radiolabeled DOC compounds and found that the uptake rate generally showed Michaelis-Menten-like saturation kinetics. All radiolabeled DOC compounds were incorporated into the POC fraction, but surprisingly also into the particulate inorganic carbon (PIC) fraction (i.e., calcite coccoliths).

These results suggest that osmotrophic uptake in coccolithophores may be significant enough to be included in carbon cycle models, especially if they can simultaneously take up a wide range of organic compounds. Surprisingly, we detected 14C-DOC in the PIC fraction after only 24 hours. This remarkably rapid incorporation is most likely due to the respiration of radiolabeled DOC into dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC), subsequently used by coccolithophores for calcification. These results have implications for the biological carbon pump and alkalinity pump paradigms, as we confirmed that both POC and PIC originate from DOC on short time scales.

 

Predators Set Range for the Ocean’s Most Abundant Phytoplankton

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Friday, April 1st, 2022 

Prochlorococcus is the world’s smallest phytoplankton (microscopic plant-like organisms) and the most numerous, with more than ten septillion individuals. This tiny plankton lives ubiquitously in warm, blue, tropical waters but is conspicuously absent in more polar regions. The prevailing theory was the cold: Prochlorococcus doesn’t grow at low temperatures. In a recent paper, the authors argue ecological control, in particular, predation by zooplankton. Cold polar waters are greener because they contain more nutrients, leading to more life and more organic matter production. This production feeds more and larger heterotrophic bacteria, who then feed larger predators—specifically the same zooplankton that consume Prochlorococcus. If the shared zooplankton increases enough, it will consume Prochlorococus faster than it can grow, causing the species to collapse at higher latitudes. These results show that an understanding of both ecology and temperature is required to predict how these ecosystems will shift in a warming ocean.

Figure 1: Surface populations of Prochlorococcus collapse (dashed lines) moving northward from Hawaii as seen in transects (transect line shown in red on map, lower left) from cruises in April 2016 (black dots) and September 2017 (green triangles). This collapse of the Prochlorococcus emerges in dynamical computer models (lower right, color indicates Prochlorococcus biomass in mgC/m3) when heterotrophic bacteria and Prochlorococcus share a grazer (top schematic). Increased organic production heading poleward first increases the heterotrophic bacterial population, increasing the shared zooplankton population which eventually consumes Prochlorococcus faster than it can grow (dashed contour).

Authors
Christopher L. Follett (MIT)
Stephanie Dutkiewicz (MIT)
François Ribalet (UW)
Emily Zakem (USC)
David Caron (USC)
E. Virginia Armbrust (UW)
Michael J. Follows (MIT)

Decline in spring chlorophyll-a concentrations in response to COVID-19 lockdown in the Yellow Sea

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Friday, February 18th, 2022 

Recently, it was reported that the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic-related lockdowns have led to a reduction in anthropogenic emissions of pollutant nitrogen on a global scale. This reduction may have induced a change in marine environmental conditions, providing a natural experiment for determining its impact on marine ecosystems. However, a direct cause-effect relationship between COVID-19 and the phytoplankton biomass has not yet been fully explored.

A recent study published in Marine Pollution Bulletin, investigated a change in satellite-derived chlorophyll-a concentrations (Chl-a) as a result of the COVID-19 lockdown. The high productivity of the Yellow Sea ecosystem is considered to be significantly attributable to high nutrient supply via atmospheric deposition from nearby anthropogenic sources of air pollution, making it an ideal location to observe this natural experiment. Further, they evaluated a significant contributing factor to change in irradiance, vertical mixing, coastal influence, and air pollutant deposition through a comparative analysis of in situ, reanalysis, and satellite-derived datasets during February‒May 2020 (representing the period of COVID-19 lockdown effect) as compared to the same period in the previous five-years (2015–2019; representing the period of no COVID-19 lockdown).

Figure 1. (a) The spatial distribution of the difference in the monthly mean Chl-a concentrations over the Yellow Sea between 2020 and 2015–2019 (ΔChl-a2020 ‒ mean (2015–2019)) in February, March, April, and May. (b) The monthly mean Chl-a averaged for the Yellow Sea (32.625–41.625 °N, 117.375–127.375 °E) during February to May 2015–2019 (pink marker) and 2020 (cyan marker). The vertical solid lines represent their standard deviation for the 2015–2019.

Figure 1. (a) The spatial distribution of the difference in the monthly mean Chl-a concentrations over the Yellow Sea between 2020 and 2015–2019 (ΔChl-a2020 ‒ mean (2015–2019)) in February, March, April, and May. (b) The monthly mean Chl-a averaged for the Yellow Sea (32.625–41.625 °N, 117.375–127.375 °E) during February to May 2015–2019 (pink marker) and 2020 (cyan marker). The vertical solid lines represent their standard deviation for the 2015–2019.

The authors captured a significant decline in Chl-a (~30%) over the Yellow Sea during February‒May 2020 compared to February‒May 2015‒2019 (Figure 1). Variations of irradiance, vertical mixing, and river discharges, were not major factors affecting this decline. Based on the analysis of transportation and constituent of atmospheric pollutants from Northern China (i.e., representing main source region of atmospheric pollutants) to Yellow Sea, the decline in Chl-a over the Yellow Sea during spring 2020 was mainly attributed to decreased atmospheric nutrient deposition due to the COVID-19 lockdown effect, a consequence of decreased anthropogenic emissions in the Northern China. Thus, further investigation is required to assess the Yellow Sea ecosystem response to re-increasing anthropogenic activities once the COVID-19 lockdown restrictions are lifted.

 

Authors:
Joo-Eun Yoon (Centre for Climate Repair at Cambridge, Cambridge University)
Seunghyun Son (CIRA, Colorado State University)
Il-Nam Kim (Department of Marine Science, Incheon National University)

New Data Standard for Oceanographic Research

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Friday, February 18th, 2022 

Effective data management is paramount in oceanographic research. The ocean is a global system, and research to understand regional and global oceanographic processes often involves compiling cruise-based data from different laboratories and expeditions.

The new international data standard covers column header abbreviations, quality control flags, missing value indicators, and standardized calculation of numerous parameters. Released alongside this paper are newly developed tools to calculate some oceanographic properties, and recommendations for dissociation constants of the seawater carbon system calculations. In addition, the use of “content” instead of “concentration” is recommended for mass-based properties.

Image of CTD alongside ship held by two people with ropes

The column header abbreviation standards presented here are based on the 30-year-old Exchange format of the World Ocean Circulation Experiment (WOCE) Hydrographic Program (Joyce and Corry, 1994; Swift and Diggs, 2008) with updates and refinements by the Climate and Ocean-Variability, Predictability, and Change (CLIVAR) and the Carbon Hydrographic Data Office (CCHDO) of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography. This format has been used as a data file standard for discrete chemical oceanographic observations for several decades.

The new international data standards will facilitate data sharing, quality control, and synthesis efforts to promote climate change and ocean acidification research at regional to global scales. This product is a significant step forward in terms of (a) creating common data standards for the international oceanographic research community to streamline data management, quality control, and data product developments; and (b) bringing the subject matter expertise from the research community to the data management world.

 

Authors (partial, see full list on publication)
Li-Qing Jiang (Univ Maryland, NOAA/NCEI)
Denis Pierrot (NOAA/AOML)
Rik Wanninkhof (NOAA/AOML)
Richard A. Feely (NOAA/PMEL)
Bronte Tilbrook (CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere and Australian Antarctic Program Partnership)
Simone Alin (NOAA/AOML)
Leticia Barbero (Univ Miami; NOAA/AOML),
Robert H. Byrne (Univ South Florida),
Brendan R. Carter (Univ Washington, NOAA/PMEL)
Andrew G. Dickson (Scripps Institution of Oceanography)
Jean-Pierre Gattuso (CNRS, Laboratoire d’Océanographie de Villefranche, Sorbonne Univ; Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations, Sciences Po, France)
Dana Greeley (NOAA/PMEL)
Mario Hoppema (Alfred Wegener Institute Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research, Sciences Po,)
Matthew P. Humphreys (NIOZ Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, Netherlands)
Johannes Karstensen (GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel, Germany)
et al.

 

Seagrass is not a silver bullet for climate change

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Friday, January 21st, 2022 

Coastal management actions aimed at protecting or restoring seagrass meadows are often assumed to have the collateral benefit of removing large amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere to combat climate change. Be aware, however: not all seagrass meadows are alike. Under certain conditions, some release more carbon dioxide than they absorb and are net carbon sources to the atmosphere. This is now shown in a new study by an international team of researchers, published in the scientific journal Science Advances. This study combined direct eddy covariance measurements of air-water gas exchange with geochemical approaches to build a comprehensive carbon budget for a tropical seagrass meadow in south Florida. The process of ecosystem calcification released far more CO2 to the atmosphere than was buried in sediments as “Blue Carbon.” This study questions the reliability of Blue Carbon approaches towards net CO2 sequestration in tropical waters. But still unclear is how applicable these results are to the global scale, and what fraction of tropical seagrass meadows are net sources, rather than sinks, of CO2 to the atmosphere.

Figure 1 : Diel trend in CO2 flux presented as discrete 30-min measurements during the study period (black circles) and annual mean fluxes for the year surrounding the study period, binned in 2-hour intervals [colored circles (x ± SD)].

Authors
Bryce R. Van Dam (Helmholtz-Zentrum Hereon)
Mary A. Zeller (Leibniz Institute for Baltic Sea Research)
Christian Lopes (Florida International University)
Ashley R. Smyth (University of Florida)
Michael E. Böttcher  (Leibniz Institute for Baltic Sea Research)
Christopher L. Osburn (North Carolina State University)
Tristan Zimmerman (Helmholtz-Zentrum Hereon)
Daniel Pröfrock (Helmholtz-Zentrum Hereon)
James W. Fourqurean (Florida International University)
Helmuth Thomas  (Helmholtz-Zentrum Hereon)

Aircraft reveal a surprisingly strong Southern Ocean carbon sink

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Friday, December 17th, 2021 

The Southern Ocean is indeed a significant carbon sink—absorbing a large amount of the excess carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere by human activities—according to a newly published study led by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR).

The findings provide clarity about the role the icy waters surrounding Antarctica play in buffering the impact of increasing greenhouse gas emissions, after research published in recent years suggested the Southern Ocean might be less of a sink than previously thought. The authors makes use of observations from research aircraft flown during three field projects over nearly a decade, as well as a collection of atmospheric models, to determine that the Southern Ocean takes up significantly more carbon than it releases.

You can’t fool the atmosphere. While measurements taken from the ocean surface and from land are important, they are too sparse to provide a reliable picture of air-sea carbon flux. The atmosphere, however, can integrate fluxes over large expanses. Airborne measurements reveal critical patterns in the global carbon cycle, a drawdown of CO2 in the lower atmosphere over the Southern Ocean surface in summer, indicating carbon uptake by the ocean.


Figure 1: Observed patterns in atmospheric CO2 over the Southern Ocean during the ORCAS airborne campaign (Jan-Feb 2016). Colors show the observed CO2 dry air mole fraction relative to the average observed within the 295–305 K potential temperature range south of 45°S on each campaign; contour lines show the observed potential temperature.

 

Authors:
M. C. Long (National Center for Atmospheric Research)
B. B. Stephens (National Center for Atmospheric Research)
K. McKain (University of Colorado, Boulder/NOAA)
C. Sweeney (NOAA)
R. F. Keeling (Scripps Institution of Oceanography)
E. A. Kort (University of Michigan)
E. J. Morgan (Scripps Institution of Oceanography)
J. D. Bent (National Center for Atmospheric Research)
N. Chandra (JAMSTEC)
F. Chevallier (Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l’Environnement)
R. Commane (Columbia University)
B. C. Daube (Harvard University)
P. B. Krummel (CSIRO)
Z. Loh (CSIRO)
I. T. Luijkx (Wageningen University)
D. Munro (University of Colorado, Boulder/NOAA)
P. Patra (JAMSTEC)
W. Peters (Wageningen University)
M. Ramonet (Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l’Environnement)
C. Rödenbeck (Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry)
A. Stavert (CSIRO)
P. Tans (NOAA)
S. C. Wofsy (Harvard University)

Eddies oxygenate the upper equatorial Pacific

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Friday, December 17th, 2021 

As the ocean warms, the future of the tropical Pacific Oxygen Minimum Zones (OMZs) remains highly uncertain, in part due to incomplete understanding of processes and poor model representation of how mesoscale circulation impacts ocean biogeochemistry. To help address these gaps, a recent paper explored how mesoscale eddies modulate dissolved oxygen distributions and variability, with a particular focus on the upper northern equatorial Pacific where eddy kinetic energy is intensified.

Figure 1: Sea Surface Temperature (SST) and oxygen concentrations at 155 m depth in an eddy resolving simulation of CESM. Tropical Instability Vortices (TIVs) are outlined by cusp-like features in SST and oxygenated cores at depth.

The authors used an eddy resolving model simulation of the Community Earth System Model (CESM) and Lagrangian particle analysis to simulate the impacts of mesoscale eddies on oxygen distribution and variability in the upper equatorial Pacific Tropical Instability Vortices (TIVs)—large eddies associated with Tropical Instability Waves—lead to a substantial oxygenation of the upper equatorial Pacific. TIVs are generated from boreal summer through winter, and contribute to the seasonal oxygenation of the northern equatorial Pacific, exhibited as a seasonal shoaling and deepening of the northern eastern ­tropical Pacific OMZ. The processes governing the simulated TIV oxygenation of the upper equatorial Pacific are dominated by physical eddy advection and mixing, while biogeochemical feedbacks (e.g. enhanced microbial consumption of oxygen in the eddy cores) play a minor role. These simulated TIV oxygenation effects stand in contrast to the deoxygenation effects of Anticyclonic Mode Water Eddies recently observed and simulated along Eastern Boundary Upwelling Systems, suggesting a diverse and complex influence of mesoscale circulation on ocean biogeochemistry.

TIV influence on oxygen is highly relevant to predicting the variability and future of ecosystem habitable space, informing the source of model biases in this region, and guiding the current revamping of the Tropical Pacific Observing System, and should be explored in future observational campaigns.

 

Authors: 
Yassir Eddebbar (Scripps UCSD)
Aneesh Subramanian (Colorado University, Boulder)
Daniel Whitt (NASA Ames Research Center)
Matthew Long (National Center for Atmospheric Research)
Ariane Verdy  (Scripps UCSD)
Matthew Mazloff  (Scripps UCSD)
Mark Merrifield  (Scripps UCSD)

Ocean Acidification drives shifts in global stoichiometry and carbon export efficiency

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Friday, November 19th, 2021 

Marine food webs and biogeochemical cycles react sensitively to increases in carbon dioxide (CO2) and associated ocean acidification, but the effects are far more complex than previously thought. A comprehensive study published in Nature Climate Change by a team of researchers from GEOMAR dove deep into the impacts of ocean acidification on marine biota and biogeochemical cycling. The authors combined data from five large-scale field experiments with natural plankton communities to investigate how carbon cycling and export respond to ocean acidification.

The biological pump is a key mechanism in transferring carbon to the deep ocean and contributes significantly to the oceans’ function as a carbon sink. The carbon-to-nitrogen ratio of sinking biogenic particles, here termed (C:Nexport), determines the amount of carbon that is transported from the euphotic zone to the ocean interior per unit nutrient, thereby controlling the efficiency of the biological pump. The authors demonstrate for the first time that ocean acidification can change the elemental composition of organic matter export, thereby potentially altering the biological pump and carbon sequestration in a future ocean (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Until now, the common assumption is that changes in C:N (and biogeochemistry, in general) are mainly driven by phytoplankton. In a series of in situ mesocosm experiments in different biomes (left), Taucher et al., (2020) found distinct impacts of ocean acidification on the C:N ratio of sinking organic matter (middle). By linking these observations to analysis of plankton community composition, the authors found a key role of heterotrophic processes in controlling the response of C:N to OA, particularly by altering the quality and carbon content of sinking organic matter within the biological pump (right).

Surprisingly, the observed responses were highly variable: C:Nexport increased or decreased significantly with increasing CO2, depending on the composition of species and the structure of the food web. The authors found that heterotrophic processes driven by bacteria and zooplankton play a key role in controlling the response of C:Nexport to ocean acidification. This contradicts the widespread paradigm that primary producers are the principal driver of biogeochemical responses to ocean change.

Considering that such diverse pathways, by which planktonic food webs shape the elemental composition and biogeochemical cycling of organic matter, are not represented in state-of-the-art earth system models, these findings also raise the question: Are currently able to predict the large-scale consequences of ocean acidification with any certainty?

 

Authors:
Jan Taucher (GEOMAR, Kiel, Germany)
Tim Boxhammer (GEOMAR, Kiel, Germany)
Lennart T. Bach (University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia)
Allanah J. Paul (GEOMAR, Kiel, Germany)
Markus Schartau (GEOMAR, Kiel, Germany)
Paul Stange (GEOMAR, Kiel, Germany)
Ulf Riebesell (GEOMAR, Kiel, Germany)

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Filter by Keyword

abundance acidification additionality advection africa air-sea air-sea interactions algae alkalinity allometry ammonium AMO AMOC anoxic Antarctic Antarctica anthro impacts anthropogenic carbon anthropogenic impacts appendicularia aquaculture aquatic continuum aragonite saturation arctic Argo argon arsenic artificial seawater AT Atlantic atmospheric CO2 atmospheric nitrogen deposition authigenic carbonates autonomous platforms AUVs bacteria bathypelagic BATS BCG Argo benthic bgc argo bio-go-ship bio-optical bioavailability biogeochemical cycles biogeochemical models biogeochemistry Biological Essential Ocean Variables biological pump biophysics bloom blue carbon bottom water boundary layer buffer capacity C14 CaCO3 calcification calcite carbon carbon-climate feedback carbon-sulfur coupling carbonate carbonate system carbon budget carbon cycle carbon dioxide carbon export carbon fluxes carbon sequestration carbon storage Caribbean CCA CCS changing marine chemistry changing marine ecosystems changing marine environments changing ocean chemistry chemical oceanographic data chemical speciation chemoautotroph chesapeake bay chl a chlorophyll circulation clouds CO2 CO3 coastal and estuarine coastal darkening coastal ocean cobalt Coccolithophores commercial community composition competition conservation cooling effect copepod copepods coral reefs CTD currents cyclone daily cycles data data access data assimilation database data management data product Data standards DCM dead zone decadal trends decomposers decomposition deep convection deep ocean deep sea coral denitrification deoxygenation depth diatoms DIC diel migration diffusion dimethylsulfide dinoflagellate dinoflagellates discrete measurements distribution DOC DOM domoic acid DOP dust DVM ecology economics ecosystem management ecosystems eddy Education EEZ Ekman transport emissions ENSO enzyme equatorial current equatorial regions ESM estuarine and coastal carbon fluxes estuary euphotic zone eutrophication evolution export export fluxes export production extreme events faecal pellets fecal pellets filter feeders filtration rates fire fish Fish carbon fisheries fishing floats fluid dynamics fluorescence food webs forage fish forams freshening freshwater frontal zone functional role future oceans gelatinous zooplankton geochemistry geoengineering geologic time GEOTRACES glaciers gliders global carbon budget global ocean global warming go-ship grazing greenhouse gas greenhouse gases Greenland ground truthing groundwater Gulf of Maine Gulf of Mexico Gulf Stream gyre harmful algal bloom high latitude human food human impact human well-being hurricane hydrogen hydrothermal hypoxia ice age ice cores ice cover industrial onset inland waters in situ inverse circulation ions iron iron fertilization iron limitation isotopes jellies katabatic winds kelvin waves krill kuroshio lab vs field land-ocean continuum larvaceans lateral transport LGM lidar ligands light light attenuation lipids low nutrient machine learning mangroves marine carbon cycle marine heatwave marine particles marine snowfall marshes mCDR mechanisms Mediterranean meltwater mesopelagic mesoscale mesoscale processes metagenome metals methane methods microbes microlayer microorganisms microplankton microscale microzooplankton midwater mitigation mixed layer mixed layers mixing mixotrophs mixotrophy model modeling model validation mode water molecular diffusion MPT MRV multi-decade n2o NAAMES NCP nearshore net community production net primary productivity new ocean state new technology Niskin bottle nitrate nitrogen nitrogen cycle nitrogen fixation nitrous oxide north atlantic north pacific North Sea NPP nuclear war nutricline nutrient budget nutrient cycles nutrient cycling nutrient limitation nutrients OA observations ocean-atmosphere ocean acidification ocean acidification data ocean alkalinity enhancement ocean carbon storage and uptake ocean carbon uptake and storage ocean color ocean modeling ocean observatories ocean warming ODZ oligotrophic omics OMZ open ocean optics organic particles oscillation outwelling overturning circulation oxygen pacific paleoceanography PAR parameter optimization parasite particle flux particles partnerships pCO2 PDO peat pelagic PETM pH phenology phosphate phosphorus photosynthesis physical processes physiology phytoplankton PIC piezophilic piezotolerant plankton POC polar polar regions policy pollutants precipitation predation predator-prey prediction pressure primary productivity Prochlorococcus productivity prokaryotes proteins pteropods pycnocline radioisotopes remineralization remote sensing repeat hydrography residence time resource management respiration resuspension rivers rocky shore Rossby waves Ross Sea ROV salinity salt marsh satellite scale seafloor seagrass sea ice sea level rise seasonal seasonality seasonal patterns seasonal trends sea spray seawater collection seaweed secchi sediments sensors sequestration shelf ocean shelf system shells ship-based observations shorelines siderophore silica silicate silicon cycle sinking sinking particles size SOCCOM soil carbon southern ocean south pacific spatial covariations speciation SST state estimation stoichiometry subduction submesoscale subpolar subtropical sulfate surf surface surface ocean Synechococcus technology teleconnections temperate temperature temporal covariations thermocline thermodynamics thermohaline thorium tidal time-series time of emergence titration top predators total alkalinity trace elements trace metals trait-based transfer efficiency transient features trawling Tris trophic transfer tropical turbulence twilight zone upper ocean upper water column upwelling US CLIVAR validation velocity gradient ventilation vertical flux vertical migration vertical transport warming water clarity water mass water quality waves weathering western boundary currents wetlands winter mixing zooplankton

Copyright © 2025 - OCB Project Office, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, 266 Woods Hole Rd, MS #25, Woods Hole, MA 02543 USA Phone: 508-289-2838  •  Fax: 508-457-2193  •  Email: ocb_news@us-ocb.org

link to nsflink to noaalink to WHOI

Funding for the Ocean Carbon & Biogeochemistry Project Office is provided by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The OCB Project Office is housed at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.