Posted on 08/01/2010 6:23:02 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Scientists may have found the most devastating impact yet of human-caused global warming — a 40% decline in phytoplankton since 1950 linked to the rise in ocean sea surface temperatures. If confirmed, it may represent the single most important finding of the year in climate science.
The headlines above are from an appropriately blunt article in The Independent about the new study in Nature, “Global phytoplankton decline over the past century” (subs. req’d). Even the Wall Street Journal warned, “Vital Marine Plants in Steep Decline.” Seth Borenstein of the AP explains, “plant plankton found in the world’s oceans are crucial to much of life on Earth. They are the foundation of the bountiful marine food web, produce half the world’s oxygen and suck up harmful carbon dioxide.”
We’ve known for a while that we are poisoning the oceans and that human emissions of carbon dioxide, left unchecked, would likely have devastating consequences — see “2010 Nature Geoscience study: Oceans are acidifying 10 times faster today than 55 million years ago when a mass extinction of marine species occurred.” And we’ve known those impacts might last a long, long time — see 2009 Nature Geoscience study concludes ocean dead zones “devoid of fish and seafood” are poised to expand and “remain for thousands of years.”
But until now, conventional wisdom has been that big ocean impacts might not be seen until the second half of the century. This new research in Nature suggests we may have much less time to act than we thought if we want to save marine life — and ourselves. The study concludes:
In the oceans, ubiquitous microscopic phototrophs (phytoplankton) account for approximately half the production of organic matter on Earth. Analyses of satellite-derived phytoplankton concentration (available since 1979) have suggested decadal-scale fluctuations linked to climate forcing, but the length of this record is insufficient to resolve longer-term trends. Here we combine available ocean transparency measurements and in situ chlorophyll observations to estimate the time dependence of phytoplankton biomass at local, regional and global scales since 1899. We observe declines in eight out of ten ocean regions, and estimate a global rate of decline of ~1% of the global median per year. Our analyses further reveal interannual to decadal phytoplankton fluctuations superimposed on long-term trends. These fluctuations are strongly correlated with basin-scale climate indices, whereas long-term declining trends are related to increasing sea surface temperatures.
The WSJ explains, “The data are more reliable for recent decades, translating into a 40% decline since 1950.” It points out:
The team investigated several factors that could have caused the decline. “We found that temperature had the best power to explain the changes,” said Boris Worm, a marine biologist at Dalhousie and co-author of the study.
Marine algae live in the upper layers of the ocean but rely on nutrients that circulate up from lower layers. Rising temperatures mean the different layers mix less with each other, so fewer nutrients reach the algae. However, Dr. Worm noted that algal abundance can be affected by other factors, such as shifts in predator-prey populations.
Mike Behrenfeld, an expert on phytoplankton at Oregon State University, said the paper was similar to a 1992 study that used Secchi data to show a long-term decline in marine algae in the north Pacific. “But this paper covers the globe,” he said. “And the scientists also took the next step of relating the [algal decline] to sea temperatures.”
Yes, I know, the marine biologist is named Boris Worm. Readers may recall that last year, Worm was lead author on a major study on fisheries in Science, and the WashPost quoted him predicting that “if fishing continued at the same rate, all the world’s seafood stocks would collapse by 2048” (see “What’s in a name? For the slimehead and toothfish, the extreme makeover leads to rampant overfishing“). And people think I’m a pessimist!
The Independent also catches a quote from Worm:
“If this holds up, something really serious is underway and has been underway for decades. I’ve been trying to think of a biological change that’s bigger than this and I can’t think of one,” said marine biologist Boris Worm of Canada’s Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia. He said: “If real, it means that the marine ecosystem today looks very different to what it was a few decades ago and a lot of this change is happening way out in the open, blue ocean where we cannot see it. I’m concerned about this finding.”
… “Phytoplankton are a critical part of our planetary life support system. They produce half of the oxygen we breathe, draw down surface CO2 and ultimately support all of our fishes.” he said.
Certainly, scientists are going to have to verify this finding in the coming years, but as AP reports:
Previous plankton research has mostly relied on satellite data that only goes back to 1978. But Worm and colleagues used a low-tech technology — disks devised by Vatican scientist Pietro Angelo Secchi, in the 19th century. These disks measure the murkiness of the ocean. The murkier the waters, the more plankton.
It’s a proxy the scientific community has long accepted as legitimate, said Paul Falkowski of Rutgers University, who has used Secchi disk data for his work.
He and other independent scientists said the methods and conclusions of the new study made sense.
Recognizing the importance of the article, Nature published a second piece by two leading ocean scientists, that discussed the methodology and findings, calling the work “an impressive synthesis of the relevant data”:
Taking great care, they created time series of phytoplankton biomass in the pelagic ocean, quantified as surface chlorophyll concentrations. They find a strong correspondence between this chlorophyll record and changes in both leading climate indices and ocean thermal conditions. They also show statistically significant long-term decreases in chlorophyll concentrations for eight of the ten ocean basins, and for the global aggregate.
We ignore these results at our gravest peril.
Related Posts:
Oh brother. Maybe we can convince all the global “warmers” to save the planet by committing suicide.
For an opposing view on this topic, see this:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/31/walking-the-plank-ton/#more-22836
Best they go back to the old drawing board and know the cause before expecting anyone to give a damn about the affect. Because things are happening that warrant some investigation, and assuming an unproven cause could have disastrous consequences.
No point in even reading this garbage. After a while, junk science loses its allure.
This got mentioned on the Oil Drum...on a Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill thread....where the water is murky and everyone is concerned...
Maybe the lack of phytoplankton is causing global warming???
Ad hoc, ergo...yaddayadda.
I knew this would happen as soon as we stopped killing off all the whales.
“More cooked data?”
Even if you could trust the data, the conclusions are highly suspect.
If “phytoplankton” are indeed dying, it’s not because they have too much food (CO2) or are too warm. Warm would decrease the amount of oxygen that sea water can dissolve, which would be detrimental to tropical fish. We are talking micro changes in temperatures though, not 20 degrees. Some fish are quite adept at dealing with temperature changes, others are not.
Perhaps if there are reduced numbers of phytoplankton, it might be because of a lower level of photons from an inactive sun.
It’s another case of synthesis of data to support a biased conclusion. They are desperate to pin mankind with planetary destruction by whatever means they conjure from whatever data they collect. No matter what, it will be the fault of U.S. industry, agriculture and Republicans.
Now it’s a Phytoplanktonic panic
osted on July 30, 2010
Borrowing a phrase from NSIDC’s Dr. Mark Serreze, Phytoplankton are now apparently in a “Death Spiral”. See Death spiral of the oceans and the original press release about an article in Nature from a PhD candidate at Dalhousie University, which started all this. I’m a bit skeptical of the method which they describe in the PR here:
A simple tool known as a Secchi disk as been used by scientists since 1899 to determine the transparency of the world’s oceans. The Secchi disk is a round disk, about the size of a dinner plate, marked with a black and white alternating pattern. It’s attached to a long string of rope which researchers slowly lower into the water. The depth at which the pattern is no longer visible is recorded and scientists use the data to determine the amount of algae present in the water.
Hmmm. A Secchi disk is a proxy, not a direct measurement of phytoplankton. It measures turbidity, which can be due to quite a number of factors, including but not limited to Phytoplankton. While they claim to also do chlorophyll measurements, the accuracy of a SD measurements made by thousands of observers is the central question.
From the literature: The Secchi disk transparency measurement is perhaps one of the oldest and simplest of all measurements. But there is grave danger of errors in such measurements where a water telescope is not utilized, as well as in the presence of water color and inorganic turbidity (source: Vollenweider and Kerekes, 1982). I’ll have more on this later. – Anthony
“We’re all gonna die. Soon.”
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Yep, I doubt that anyone I currently know will be alive a hundred and fifty years from now. I guess I will just have to make new friends. I probably need something to smoke so I won’t keep thinking about it.
Logan’s Run, have not seen that in a while!
Unfortunately, they have not posted up the data that they actually used. Nor have they shown any of their data in the form of graphs or tables. Instead, they have shown model results, and merely pointed to general websites where a variety of datasets are maintained. So we don’t know, for example, whether they used the 1° grid version or the 2.5° grid version of a given dataset. Nor have they posted the computer code that they used in the analysis. Plus, the very first link in their paper to the first and most important data source is dead.
From the link you provided.
Same shit different day.. Hide the real data..
Act like their models are real.
This is a Soros-financed propaganda mill run by John Podesta’s Center for American Progress. Podesta is truly the contemporary American version of Joseph Goebbels. Nothing from this source, especially if it’s written by Seth Borenstein and distributed by the AP, can be trusted. Lies in, lies out.
We all know what the nefarious Plankton is really up to...
Phytoplankton growth depends on the availability of carbon dioxide, sunlight, and nutrients. Phytoplankton, like land plants, require nutrients such as nitrate, phosphate, silicate, and calcium at various levels depending on the species. Some phytoplankton can fix nitrogen and can grow in areas where nitrate concentrations are low. They also require trace amounts of iron which limits phytoplankton growth in large areas of the ocean because iron concentrations are very low. Other factors influence phytoplankton growth rates, including water temperature and salinity, water depth, wind, and what kinds of predators are grazing on them.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Phytoplankton/
Nutrition and not temperature are determinants of growth.
Falling CO lvls can restrict their growth.
Facinating paper at your link!
The author’s conclusion of the Globull Warmer’s claim and dire prediction lacks the essential database by which they derived their conclusion, is precisely the same game the others got in trouble, by either hiding or faking data.
This will fly less than the original globull warming stuff did. Enough people have now learned it is a false cry of wolf.
Keep those scams a coming.
3 survivors...too old to be breeders.
Women and children hardest hit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.