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 Time-series
      • US Biogeochemical-Argo
      • Ocean-Atmosphere Interaction
  • 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 19

Krillin’ it with poop: Highlighting the importance of Antarctic krill in ocean carbon and nutrient cycling

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Tuesday, February 4th, 2020 

Scientists have long known the role of Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba) in Southern Ocean ecosystems. Evidence is gathering about krill’s biogeochemical importance through releasing millions of faecal pellets in swarms and stimulating primary production through nutrient excretion. Here, we explore and synthesise the known impacts that this highly abundant and rather large species has on the environment. Krill exemplify how metazoa can play a dominant role in shaping ocean biogeochemistry, thus providing additional motivation for protecting certain harvested species.

Figure 1: The ecological roles of krill in Southern Ocean biogeochemical cycles, including releasing faecal pellets, excreting nutrients whilst grazing, and larval krill migrating throughout the water column, shedding exoskeletons, and feeding on the seabed.

A review published in Nature Communications uncovers at least 13 possible pathways by which Antarctic krill either influence the carbon sink or release fertilizing nutrients (Figure 1). Their large size (up to 7 cm) and swarming nature (millions of krill aggregate) enable krill to strongly impact ocean biogeochemistry. Swarms release large numbers of faecal pellets, overwhelming detritivores and resulting in a large sink of faecal carbon. Krill may physically mix nutrients from the deep ocean and become a decades-long carbon store in whale biomass. Antarctic krill larvae, which live near the sea-ice, undergo deeper diel vertical migrations compared to adult Antarctic krill (400 m vs. 200 m), so any carbon respired or faecal pellets released by larvae could remain in the deep ocean longer than those released by adult krill at a shallower depth; the larval krill contribution to carbon export has not been quantified. Furthermore, it is currently unknown how many krill larvae are removed from the Antarctic krill fishery as by-catch. Perhaps the biggest challenge in constraining the role of krill (adult and larvae) in biogeochemical cycles is our limited capacity to quantify the abundance and biomass of Antarctic krill, since shipboard sampling methods (nets or acoustics) have limited spatial and temporal coverage. Ultimately, the Southern Ocean is an important physical AND biological sink of carbon, and we must consider the role krill and other animals have in this cycle.

Figure 2: Processes in the biological carbon pump including the sinking of dead phytoplankton aggregates, zooplankton, krill and fish faecal pellets and dead animals. Microbial remineralisation is depicted through the return of particulate organic carbon to dissolved organic carbon (DOC) and eventually carbon dioxide.

Authors:
Emma Cavan (Imperial College London and University of Tasmania)
Anna Belcher (British Antarctic Survey)
Angus Atkinson (Plymouth Marine Laboratory)
Simeon Hill (British Antarctic Survey)
So Kawaguchi (Australian Antarctic Division)
Stacey McCormack (University of Tasmania)
Bettina Meyer (Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research and University of Oldenburg)
Stephen Nicol (University of Tasmania)
Lavenia Ratnarajah (University of Liverpool)
Katrin Schmidt (University of Plymouth)
Deborah Steinberg (Virginia Institute of Marine Science)
Geraint Tarling (British Antarctic Survey)
Philip Boyd (University of Tasmania and Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre)

Diatoms commit iron piracy with stolen bacterial gene

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Tuesday, February 4th, 2020 

Since diatoms carry out much of the primary production in iron-limited marine environments, constraining the details of how these phytoplankton acquire the iron they need is paramount to our understanding of biogeochemical cycles of iron-depleted high-nutrient low-chlorophyll (HNLC) regions. The proteins involved in this process are largely unknown, but McQuaid et al. (2018) scientists described a carbonate-dependent uptake protein that enables diatoms to access inorganic iron dissolved in seawater. As increasing atmospheric CO2 results in decreased seawater carbonate ion concentrations, this iron uptake strategy may have an uncertain future. In a recent study published in PNAS, authors used CRISPR technology to characterize a parallel uptake system that requires no carbonate and is therefore not impacted by ocean acidification.

This system targets an organically complexed form of iron (siderophores, molecules that bind and transport iron in microorganisms) that is only produced by co-occurring microbes. Two genes are required to convert siderophores from a potent toxicant to an essential nutrient. One of these (FBP1) is a receptor that was horizontally acquired from siderophore-producing bacteria. The other (FRE2) is a eukaryotic reductase that facilitates the dissociation of Fe-siderophore complexes.

Figure caption: (A) Growth curves of diatom cultures ( • = WT, ◇ = ΔFBP1, ☐ = ΔFRE2) in low iron media. (B) Growth in same media with siderophores added. (C) Diatoms under 1000x magnification, brightfield. (D) mCherry-FBP1. (E) Plastid autofluorescence. (F) YFP-FRE2. (G) Phylogenetic tree of FBP1 and related homologs.

Are diatoms really stealing siderophores from hapless bacteria? The true nature of this interaction is unknown and may at times be mutualistic. For example, when iron availability limits the carbon supply to a microbial community, heterotrophic bacteria may benefit from using siderophores to divert iron to diatom companions. Further work is needed to understand the true ecological basis for this interaction, but these results suggest that as long as diatoms and bacteria co-occur, iron limitation in marine ecosystems will not be exacerbated by ocean acidification.

Authors:
Tyler Coale (Scripps Institution of Oceanography, J.Craig Venter Institute)
Mark Moosburner (Scripps Institution of Oceanography, J.Craig Venter Institute)
Aleš Horák (Biology Centre CAS, Institute of Parasitology, University of South Bohemia)
Miroslav Oborník (Biology Centre CAS, Institute of Parasitology, University of South Bohemia)
Katherine Barbeau (Scripps Institution of Oceanography)
Andrew Allen (Scripps Institution of Oceanography, J.Craig Venter Institute)

Also see joint post on the GEOTRACES website

Ocean iron fertilization commercialization: bad idea; Continued research: good idea

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Tuesday, January 21st, 2020 

Amidst little to no substantive global action on climate change mitigation, individuals and companies have been exploring various geoengineering strategies as a possible alternative. Ocean Iron Fertilization (OIF) is an ocean-based strategy that involves the addition of iron to the sunlit upper layers of the ocean in iron-limited areas such as the Southern Ocean in order to stimulate marine phytoplankton growth and increase drawdown of carbon dioxide. Authors of a recent technology review in the Journal of Science Policy & Governance argue that a market-based approach to Southern Ocean iron fertilization is not advisable, but recommends continued research into the matter.

Figure 1: Idealized schematic of carbon cycling and the biological in a natural High Nutrient Low Chlorophyll Region (HNLC) and an iron fertilized HLNC. White arrows represent carbon transport. The addition of iron may dramatically increase surface biomass but only a small fraction of that is additional sequestered in the deep ocean or the sea floor.

This study begins by asking whether or not fertilizing the Southern Ocean could actually create a sustainable carbon sink. A comprehensive literature review revealed that while iron fertilization almost certainly will stimulate new primary production, what is much less clear is how much of that carbon will sink out of the surface ocean and be sequestered long-term. Given the scientific uncertainty, it would be ill-advised to commercialize iron fertilization in emerging carbon offset markets. In addition to concerns about the fundamental feasibility and potential adverse side effect of fertilization, the study argues that any market framework would be corrupted by perverse incentives created by the inability to establish reliable baselines or to accurately and comprehensively document and quantify the effects of fertilization, thus making it impossible to provide fair and consistent compensation. Nevertheless, recent history shows that fertilization activity on unregulated voluntary offset markets motivated by the promise of an easy fix can and will continue to emerge. This study concludes that continued research is needed to constrain the public perception and clarify the reality of an iron bullet.

Author:
Tyler Rohr (MIT/WHOI, currently at US Department of Energy)

The past, present, and future of the ocean carbon cycle: A global data product with regional insights

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Tuesday, January 21st, 2020 

A new study published in Scientific Reports debuts a global data product of ocean acidification (OA) and buffer capacity from the beginning of the Industrial Revolution to the end of the century (1750-2100 C.E.). To develop this product, the authors linked one of the richest observational carbon dioxide (CO2) data products (6th version of the Surface Ocean CO2 Atlas, 1991-2018, ~23 million observations) with temporal trends modeled at individual locations in the global ocean. By linking the modeled pH trends to the observed modern pH distribution, the climatology benefits from recent improvements in both model design and observational data coverage, and is likely to provide more accurate regional OA trajectories than the model output alone. The authors also show that air-sea CO2 disequilibrium is the dominant mode of spatial variability for surface pH, and discuss why pH and calcium carbonate mineral saturation states (Omega), two important metrics for OA, show contrasting spatial variability. They discover that sea surface temperature (SST) imposes two large but cancelling effects on surface ocean pH and Omega, i.e., the effects of SST on (a) chemical speciation of the carbonic system; and (b) air-sea exchange of CO2 and the subsequent DIC/TA ratio of the seawater. These two processes act in concert for Omega but oppose each other for pH. As a result, while Omega is markedly lower in the colder polar regions than in the warmer subtropical and tropical regions, surface ocean pH shows little latitudinal variation.

Figure 1. Spatial distribution of global surface ocean pHT (total hydrogen scale, annually averaged) in past (1770), present (2000) and future (2100) under the IPCC RCP8.5 scenario.

This data product, which extends from the pre-Industrial era (1750 C.E.) to the end of this century under historical atmospheric CO2 concentrations (pre-2005) and the Representative Concentrations Pathways (post-2005) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)’s 5th Assessment Report, may be helpful to policy-makers and managers who are developing regional adaptation strategies for ocean acidification.

The published paper is available here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-55039-4

The data product is available here: https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/oads/data/0206289.xml

 

Authors:
Li-Qing Jiang (University of Maryland and NOAA NCEI)
Brendan Carter (NOAA PMEL and University of Washington JISAO)
Richard Feely (NOAA PMEL)
Siv Lauvset, Are Olsen (University of Bergen and Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research, Norway)

Surface bacterial communities respond to rapid changes in the western Arctic

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Tuesday, January 7th, 2020 

During the western Arctic summer open water season, latitudinal differences in the physical and biogeochemical features of the surface water are apparent from the Bering Strait to the Chukchi Borderland. Lower latitude regions (i.e. Bering Strait to Chukchi Shelf) are primarily driven by the inflow of Pacific waters that supply nutrients and heat, leading to high primary production. Conversely, the higher latitude regions (i.e. Chukchi Borderland and Canada Basin) are relatively cold, fresh, and oligotrophic because the surface layer is influenced by freshwater inputs from melting ice and rivers via the Beaufort Gyre. Mixing of the two surface water masses in the western Arctic produces a physicochemical frontal zone (FZ) in the Chukchi Sea.

In a recent study published in Scientific Reports, authors used observations from summer 2017 to investigate latitudinal variations in bacterial community composition in surface waters between the Bering Strait and Chukchi Borderland and the underlying processes driving the changes. Results indicate three distinctive communities: 1) Southern Chukchi (SC) bacterial communities are associated with nutrient-rich conditions, including genera such as Sulfitobacter; 2) a northern Chukchi (NC) bacterial community that dominated by SAR clades, Flavobacterium, Paraglaciecola, and Polaribacter, genera associated with low nutrients and sea ice conditions. If climate-driven changes in the western Arctic continue along the same trajectory, it’s likely we will see altered bacterial communities. If the impact of warm, nutrient-rich Pacific water inflows dominates, it is likely that the productive SC region will expand ­­and the FZ will move northward, leading to nutrient enrichment in the western Arctic (Figure 1). In response, bacterial communities would be dominated by organic matter decomposers, such as Sulfitobacter, due to high primary productivity. However, if the impact of sea-ice meltwater dominates, then the oligotrophic NC region will expand and the FZ will move southward, leading to nutrient depletion in western Arctic surface waters (Figure 1). Continued monitoring in this region will enhance our understanding of how bacterial communities respond (Figure 1b) to a rapidly changing western Arctic Ocean.

Figure 1. (a) Map of the August 2017 Ice Breaker RV Araon western Arctic Ocean sampling stations used in this study. The basemap shows the Chl-a concentration contour (blue to red background colors). Pink, green, and blue circles represent stations in the South Chukchi (SC), Frontal Zone (FZ), and Northern Chukchi (NC) regions. (b) Schematic diagram of surface bacterial community distribution in response to future western Arctic Ocean changes.

Authors:
Il-Nam Kim (Department of Marine Science, Incheon National University)
Sung-Ho Kang (Korea Polar Research Institute)
Eun Jin Yang (Korea Polar Research Institute)

Unexpected DOC additions in the deep Atlantic

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Tuesday, January 7th, 2020 

Oceanic dissolved organic carbon (DOC) ultimately exchanges with atmospheric CO2 and thus represents an important carbon source/sink with consequence for climate. Most of the DOC is recalcitrant to microbial degradation, with some fractions surviving for thousands of years. Therefore, DOC in the deep ocean was thought to be stable or to decrease slowly over decades to centuries due to biotic and abiotic sinks. However, a study published in Global Biogeochemical Cycles shows that there are some zones of the deep Atlantic Ocean where recalcitrant DOC experiences net production. Using data from oceanographic cruises across the Atlantic Ocean, the authors first identified the major water masses in the basin and the percentage of each in every sample taken for DOC analysis. The study revealed net additions of 27 million tons of dissolved organic carbon per year in the deep South Atlantic. On the other hand, the North Atlantic serves as a net sink, removing 298 million tons of carbon annually. DOC production observed in the deep Atlantic is probably due to the sinking particles that solubilize into DOC, since DOC enrichment was most evident at latitudes characterized as elevated productivity divergence zones.

Figure 1. Water masses along GO-SHIP line A16 (colored dots) and recalcitrant DOC variations due to biogeochemical processes (black dots within each water mass) in the deep Atlantic Ocean. Water mass domains are defined as the set of samples with the corresponding water mass proportion ≥50%. Recalcitrant DOC latitudinal variations per water stratum due to biogeochemical processes (ΔDOC) is in μmol kg-1. Numbers on the plots are DOC values for the corresponding dots. Scales (not shown) are the same for all the plots, from -4 to 6 μmol kg-1. Positive (negative) ΔDOC indicates values higher (lower) than the average DOC calculated for each water mass using an optimum multiparameter (OMP) analysis. DOC = dissolved organic carbon. AAIW = Antarctic Intermediate Water; UNADW = upper North Atlantic Deep Water; ISOW = Iceland Scotland Overflow Water; CDW = Circumpolar Deep Water; WSDW = Weddell Sea Deep Water. Figure created with Ocean Data View (Schlitzer, 2015).

Considering that the net DOC production over the entire Atlantic basin euphotic zone is 0.70–0.75 Pg C year-1, the authors estimated that 30–39% of that DOC is consumed in the deep Atlantic subsequent to its export by overturning circulation. The upper North Atlantic Deep Water (UNADW) acts as the primary sink, accounting for 66% of the recalcitrant DOC removal in the North Atlantic. Conversely, the Antarctic Intermediate Water (AAIW) is the primary recipient, with 45% of recalcitrant DOC production in the South Atlantic, closely followed by the old UNADW that gains 44% of the recalcitrant DOC in the southern basin.

The Atlantic works as a mosaic of water masses, where both removal and addition of recalcitrant DOC occurs, with the dominant term dependent on the origin, temperature, age and depth of the water masses. The production of recalcitrant DOC in the deep ocean should be considered in biogeochemical models dealing with the carbon cycle and climate.

Authors:
C. Romera-Castillo and J. L. Pelegrí (Instituto de Ciencias del Mar, CSIC, Spain)
M. Álvarez (Instituto Español de Oceanografía, Spain)
D. A. Hansell (University of Miami, USA)
X. A. Álvarez-Salgado (Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas, CSIC, Spain)

The ocean’s smallest phytoplankton may be bigger than we thought

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Tuesday, December 17th, 2019 

Flow cytometry can sort hundreds of thousands of phytoplankton cells in minutes, a tool that has been exploited for over thirty years in marine science. However, skilled analysts are still needed for manual interpretation of these cells into different types and then further into size distributions and optical properties.

In a recent study published in Applied Optics, the authors developed and implemented an automated scheme on the large Atlantic Meridional Transect flow cytometric database, which contains around 104 samples and 109 cells (the entire AMT flowcytometric dataset which spans a decade of transects (AMT18 – AMT27). This unique, well-calibrated dataset spans 100° of latitude between the UK and the Falklands, with multiple samples between 0-200m. The results clearly show that Prochlorococcus, very small marine cyanobacteria, are consistently larger than previously thought (>0.65 µm), and their size distribution reveals a distinctive double peak (0.75 µm and 1.75 µm) that varies strongly with depth. This is coupled with changes in Prochlorococcus optical properties, a term we have coined “opto-types.”  By contrast, Synechococcus are typically 1.5 µm in diameter and more homogeneously dispersed.

Figure 1: North to South transect (bottom left) of the Atlantic Ocean showing the variability in the abundance (top left), size (top right) and refractive index (bottom right) of Prochlorococcus

This work has uncovered new information regarding the size distribution of the ocean’s smallest phytoplankton, which has implications for how energy is transferred between different biological organisms.

 

Authors:
Tim Smyth (Plymouth Marine Laboratory)
Glen Tarran (Plymouth Marine Laboratory)
Shubha Sathyendranath (Plymouth Marine Laboratory)

What really controls deep-seafloor calcite dissolution?

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Monday, December 16th, 2019 

On time scales of tens to millions of years, seawater acidity is primarily controlled by biogenic calcite (CaCO3) dissolution on the seafloor. Our quantitative understanding of future oceanic pH and carbonate system chemistry requires knowledge of what controls this dissolution. Past experiments on the dissolution rate of suspended calcite grains have consistently suggested a high-order, nonlinear dependence on undersaturation that is independent of fluid flow rate. This form of kinetics has been extensively adopted in models of deep-sea calcite dissolution and pH of benthic sediments. However, stirred-chamber and rotating-disc dissolution experiments have consistently demonstrated linear kinetics of dissolution and a strong dependence on fluid flow velocity. This experimental discrepancy surrounding the kinetic control of seafloor calcite dissolution precludes robust predictions of oceanic response to anthropogenic acidification.

In a recent study published in Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, authors have reconciled these divergent experimental results through an equation for the mass balance of the carbonate ion at the sediment-water interface (SWI), which equates the rate of production of that ion via dissolution and its diffusion in sediment porewaters to the transport across the diffusive sublayer (DBL) at the SWI. If the rate constant derived from suspended-grain experiments is inserted into this balance equation, the rate of carbonate ion supply to the SWI from the sediment (sediment-side control) is much greater in the oceans than the rate of transfer across the DBL (water-side control). Thus, calcite dissolution at the seafloor, while technically under mixed control, is strongly water-side dominated. Consequently, a model that neglects boundary-layer transport (sediment-side control alone) invariably predicts CaCO3-versus-depth profiles that are too shallow compared to available data (Figure 1). These new findings will inform future attempts to model the ocean’s response to acidification.

Figure 1: Plots of the calcite (CaCO3) content of deep-sea sediments as a function of oceanic depth. Left panel: data from the Northwestern Atlantic Ocean. Right panel: data from the Southwest Pacific Ocean. The blue line represents predicted CaCO3 content assuming no boundary-layer effects (pure sediment-side control). The red line is the prediction that includes both sediment and water effects (mixed control), and the green line is the prediction with pure water-side control. The agreement between the red and green lines signifies that calcite dissolution is essentially water-side controlled at the seafloor. These results are duplicated for all tested regions of the oceans.

Authors:
Bernard P. Boudreau (Dalhousie University)
Olivier Sulpis (University of Utrecht)
Alfonso Mucci (McGill University)

Estimating the large-scale biological pump: Do eddies matter?

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Wednesday, December 4th, 2019 

One factor that limits our capacity to quantify the ocean biological carbon pump is uncertainty associated with the physical injection of particulate (POC) and dissolved (DOC) organic carbon to the ocean interior. It is challenging to integrate the effects of these pumps, which operate at small spatial (<100 km) and temporal (<1 month) scales. Previous observational and fine-scale modeling studies have thus far been unable to quantify these small-scale effects. In a recent study published in Global Biogeochemical Cycles, authors explored the influence of these physical carbon pumps relative to sinking (gravity-driven) particles on annual and regional scales using a high-resolution (2 km) biophysical model of the North Atlantic that simulates intense eddy-driven subduction hotspots that are consistent with observations.

Figure 1: North Atlantic idealized double gyre ocean biophysical model. Top: Sea surface temperature, surface chlorophyll and mixed-layer depth during the spring bloom (March 21). Bottom: total export of organic carbon (POC+DOC) at 100 and individual contributions from the gravitational (particle sinking) and subduction (mixing, eddy advection and Ekman pumping) pumps for one day during the spring bloom (March 21) and averaged annually. Physical subduction hotspots visible on the daily export contribute little to the annual export due to strong compensation of upward and downward motions.

The authors showed that eddy dynamics can transport carbon below the mixed-layer (500-1000 m depth), but this mechanism contributes little (<5%) to annual export at the basin scale due to strong compensation between upward and downward fluxes (Figure 1). Additionally, the authors evidenced that small-scale mixing events intermittently export large amounts of suspended DOC and POC.

These results underscore the need to expand the traditional view of the mixed-layer carbon pump (wintertime export of DOC) to include downward mixing of POC associated with short-lived springtime mixing events, as well as eddy-driven subduction, which can contribute to longer-term ocean carbon storage. High-resolution measurements are needed to validate these model results and constrain the magnitude of the compensation between upward and downward carbon transport by small-scale physical processes.

 

Authors:
Laure Resplandy (Princeton University)
Marina Lévy (Sorbonne Université)
Dennis J. McGillicuddy Jr. (WHOI)

A role for tropical nitrogen fixers in glacial CO2 drawdown

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Wednesday, December 4th, 2019 

Iron fertilization of marine phytoplankton by Aeolian dust is a well-established mechanism for atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) drawdown by the ocean. When atmospheric CO2 decreased by 90-100 ppm during previous ice ages, fertilization of iron-limited phytoplankton in the high latitudes was thought to have contributed up to 1/3 (30 ppm) of the total CO2 drawdown. Unfortunately, recent modeling studies suggest that substantially less CO2 (only 2-10 ppm) is sequestered by the ocean in response to high latitude fertilization.

The limited capacity for high latitude CO­2 sequestration in response to iron enrichment motivated the authors of a new study published in Nature Communications to address how lower latitude phytoplankton could contribute to CO2 drawdown. The authors used an ocean model to show that in response to Aeolian iron fertilization, dinitrogen (N2) fixers, specialized phytoplankton that introduce bioavailable nitrogen to tropical surface waters, drive the sequestration of an additional 7-16 ppm of CO2 by the ocean.

Figure 1: Scenarios of Fe supply to the tropical Pacific. In the low iron scenario, analogous to the modern climate, N2 fixation (yellow zone and dots) is concentrated in the Northwest and Southwest subtropical Pacific where aeolian dust deposition is greatest. Non-limiting PO4 concentrations (green zone and dots) exist within the tropics and spread laterally from the area of upwelling near the Americas and at the equator (blue zone). In the high Fe scenario, analogous to the glacial climate, N2 fixation couples to the upwelling zones in the east Pacific, enabling strong utilisation of PO4, the vertical expansion of suboxic zones (grey bubbles) and a deeper injection of carbon-enriched organic matter (downward squiggly arrows).

These results provide evidence of a tropical ocean CO2 sequestration pathway, the mere existence of which is hotly debated. Importantly, the study describes an additional mechanism of CO2 drawdown that is complementary to the high latitude mechanism. When combined, their contributions elevate iron-driven CO2 drawdown towards the expected 30 ppm, making iron fertilization a driver of a stronger biological pump on a global scale.

 

Authors:
Pearse Buchanan (University of Liverpool, University of Tasmania, CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, ARC Centre of Excellence in Climate System Science)
Zanna Chase (University of Tasmania)
Richard Matear (CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, ARC Centre of Excellence in Climate Extremes)
Steven Phipps (University of Tasmania)
Nathaniel Bindoff (University of Tasmania, CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, ARC Centre of Excellence in Climate Extremes, Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre)

« 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 Atlantic atmospheric CO2 atmospheric nitrogen deposition authigenic carbonates autonomous platforms 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 CO2 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 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.