As we contemplate why there are such high levels of algae in the waters of the Arctic ocean this article may provide some insight into where it might be leading
Algae
and bacteria hogged oxygen after ancient mass extinction, slowing
recovery of marine life, say Stanford researchers
After
the biggest mass extinction in Earth's history – 250 million years
ago – algae and bacteria in the ocean rebounded so fast that they
consumed virtually all the oxygen in the sea, slowing the recovery of
the rest of marine animals for several million years.
24
March, 2011
A
mass extinction is hard enough for Earth's biosphere to handle, but
when you chase it with prolonged oxygen deprivation, the biota ends
up with a hangover that can last millions of years.
Such
was the situation with the greatest mass extinction in Earth's
history 250 million years ago, when 90 percent of all marine animal
species were wiped out, along with a huge proportion of plant, animal
and insect species on land.
A
massive amount of volcanism in Siberia is widely credited with
driving the disaster, but even after the immense outpourings of lava
and toxic gases tapered off, oxygen levels in the oceans, which had
been depleted, remained low for about 5 million years, slowing life's
recovery there to an unusual degree.
The
reason for the lingering low oxygen levels has puzzled scientists,
but now Stanford researchers have figured out what probably happened.
By analyzing the chemical composition of some then-underwater
limestone beds deposited over the course of the recovery in what is
now southern China, they have determined that while it took several
million years for most ecosystems in the ocean to recover, tiny
single-celled algae and bacteria bounced back much more quickly.
In
fact, according to biogeochemist Katja Meyer, the tiny organisms
rebounded to such an extent that the bigger life forms couldn't catch
a break – much less their breath – because the little ones were
enjoying a sustained population explosion.
As
the vast hordes of tiny dead organisms rotted, dissolved oxygen in
the seawater was consumed by aerobic microbes involved in the decay
process, leaving scant oxygen for larger organisms in what became an
oxygen-depleted, or anoxic, environment.
Biogeochemist
Katja Meyer
The
driver of the ongoing population boom appears to have been the
massive amounts of carbon dioxide pumped into the atmosphere during
the volcanism, Meyer said, which caused the world to warm.
"More
warmth means an invigorated hydrological cycle, so you get more rain
and this rain is also more acidic because there is more carbon
dioxide dissolved in the rain," Meyer said.
The
increased amounts of more acidic rain increased weathering of the
land surface, which sent more nutrients into the ocean, which fueled
explosions of life such as algae blooms.
"It
is kind of counterintuitive that high productivity on the part of
algae and bacteria would likely be generating these toxic geochemical
conditions that prevent most of animal life from recovering from mass
extinction," Meyer said.
But
the process, she said, is basically the same as when excess runoff
from fertilizers goes into a body of water, whether it's a pond on a
golf course or the infamous dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico created
by farm runoff carried down the Mississippi River.
"You
get this giant bloom of algae and then it starts to smell bad as that
algae decays, pulling oxygen out of the water and causing fish
die-offs," Meyer said.
In
spite of the almost inestimably high numbers of algae and bacteria
living and dying during this time, there is little direct evidence of
them in the fossil record because such tiny, soft-bodied creatures
just don't preserve well.
So
Meyer and her colleagues had to work with indirect evidence of the
microorganisms to determine their abundance during the years after
the mass extinction. The population proxy they used was the carbon
present in the limestone.
Carbon
– like all elements – comes in different varieties, called
isotopes, distinguished by the number of neutrons each has in its
nucleus. The researchers worked with two carbon isotopes, carbon 12,
which has six neutrons, and carbon 13, which has seven.
Both
isotopes are present in ocean water, but living things on Earth have
always shown a preference for incorporating the lighter isotope,
carbon 12, into their structures. Thus, where life is abundant, the
ratio of carbon 13 to carbon 12 in seawater is higher than it is
where there is no life.
Limestone
records the composition of the seawater in which it was deposited,
including the relative amounts of light and heavy carbon isotopes, so
by analyzing the isotope ratio in the rocks, Meyer could infer the
abundance of life in the water where the limestone formed.
Comparable
modern environments, such as the Bahama Banks in the Caribbean Sea,
where carbonate platforms similar to the limestones are forming, are
typically teeming with life at the range of depths in which Meyer's
limestones formed. In these environments, the ratio of carbon 13 to
carbon 12 is generally constant from shallow to deep water.
But
microorganisms are typically most abundant in shallow waters, so if
marine life in the era after the mass extinction had been confined to
algae and bacteria, then the shallower depths should show a markedly
greater ratio of carbon 13 to carbon 12 than would be found at depth.
Meyer's
analysis showed there was a difference of about 4 parts per thousand
in carbon isotope ratios from the shallow waters to depths, roughly
twice what it is today.
"We
only see this gradient in the interval after the mass extinction
prior to the recovery of animal life," said Meyer.
Meyer
is the lead author of a research paper about the study published last
month in Earth
and Planetary Science Letters.
The extinction 250 million years ago is known as the Permian-Triassic
mass extinction, as it coincides with the end of the Permian period
and the beginning of the Triassic period on the geologic time scale.
"It
appears there was a huge amount of biological productivity in the
shallow waters that was making the bottom waters uninhabitable for
animals," said Jonathan Payne, assistant professor of geological
and environmental sciences, who is a coauthor of the paper and in
whose lab Meyer has been working.
"It
looks like the whole recovery was slowed by having too much food
available, rather than too little," Payne said. "Most of us
think that if the biota isn't doing well, maybe we should feed it
more. This is clearly an example where feeding it less would have
been much better."
Funding
for the research was provided by the National Science Foundation,
Agouron Institute, American Chemical Society and National Geographic
Society.
EDITOR'S NOTE
Research
paper in Earth
and Planetary Science Letters (DOI:
10.1016/j.epsl.2010.12.033)
MEDIA CONTACT
Louis
Bergeron, Stanford News Service: (650) 725-1944, louisb3@stanford.edu
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.