Transparent exopolymer particles (TEP) under ocean acidification conditions
description
Transcript of Transparent exopolymer particles (TEP) under ocean acidification conditions
Transparent exopolymer particles (TEP) under ocean
acidification conditions
Presented by Daneil Newcomb at Friday Harbor Labs for the Ocean Acidification Apprenticeship
What is TEP?• A carbohydrate rich polysaccharide form of organic matter
produced by phytoplankton and some bacteria• Most likely produced as a response to cell stress (too little or too
much of a resource), not seen in actively growing cells • Increased TEP production is correlated with the maintenance
and senescence phases of phytoplankton growth• In previous ocean acidification studies:
– Bulk TEP has been correlated to chlorophyll-a, bacterial production, dissolved organic matter, and particulate organic matter• These correlations appear to be dependent on the presence of a phytoplankton bloom.
• A possible mechanism to increase export of carbon from surface waters to depth
(Wurl et al. 2011)
Phytoplankton exude polysaccharides
(Wurl et al. 2011)
Phytoplankton exude polysaccharides TEP is formed through
aggregation
(Wurl et al. 2011)
TEP is formed through aggregation
Phytoplankton exude polysaccharides
Aggregates are removed from system via export
marine snow
(Wurl et al. 2011)
Factors affecting TEP production and cycling
• Abiotic– Temperature– Turbulence– pH– Nutrients– Sedimentation
• Biotic– Phytoplankton and
bacterial production– Bacterial
remineralization– Viral lysis– Grazing by zoo- and
microzooplankton
Factors affecting TEP production and cycling
• Abiotic– Temperature– Turbulence– pH– Nutrients– Sedimentation
• Biotic– Phytoplankton and
bacterial production– Bacterial
remineralization– Viral lysis– Grazing by zoo- and
microzooplankton
Factors affecting TEP production and cycling
• Abiotic– Temperature– Turbulence– pH– Nutrients– Sedimentation
• Biotic– Phytoplankton and
bacterial production– Bacterial
remineralization– Viral lysis– Grazing by zoo- and
microzooplankton
Factors affecting TEP production and cycling
• Abiotic– Temperature– Turbulence– pH– Nutrients– Sedimentation
• Biotic– Phytoplankton and
bacterial production– Bacterial
remineralization– Viral lysis– Grazing by zoo- and
microzooplankton
Factors affecting TEP production and cycling
• Abiotic– Temperature– Turbulence– pH– Nutrients– Sedimentation
• Biotic– Phytoplankton and
bacterial production– Bacterial
remineralization– Viral lysis– Grazing by zoo- and
microzooplankton
Factors affecting TEP production and cycling
• Abiotic– Temperature– Turbulence– pH– Nutrients– Sedimentation
• Biotic– Phytoplankton and
bacterial production– Bacterial
remineralization– Viral lysis– Grazing by zoo- and
microzooplankton
Experimental Objectives
• Determine how chosen factors affect TEP production within the mesocosm experiment– To examine correlations between bulk TEP
production and phytoplankton, bacteria, and microzooplankton.
– To determine any significant difference in TEP production between in situ water conditions and FHL and the acidified ocean of the future.
Materials and Methods
• Nine mesocosms, three treatments
• Duplicate samples taken with an integrated sampler
• Samples filtered within two hours of collection*
* Except made for fossil hunting
Materials and Methods
• Analyzing TEP– Filters are stained with
Alcian Blue, soaked in 80% sulfuric acid, then analyzed using the colorimetric method.
• Absorbance is related to weights using a calibration curve
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 2000
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
f(x) = 0.00110775654408222 x + 0.0252643556860676R² = 0.920987852328837
f(x) = 0.00073285264969438 x + 0.0201494866773486R² = 0.574697241955753
f(x) = 0.000830184635169479 x + 0.0575097522888025R² = 0.682588050178922
Gum Xanthan (mg)
Abs
orpt
ion
(E78
7 - C
787)
TEP Mesocosm Time Series
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Time (Days)
Med
ian
TE
P (m
g G
um X
anth
an L
-1)
HIGHCONTROLDRIFTDOCK
TEP Mesocosm Time Series
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Time (Days)
Med
ian
TE
P (m
g G
um X
anth
an L
-1)
TEP Mesocosm Time Series
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Time (Days)
Med
ian
TE
P (m
g G
um X
anth
an L
-1)
Drift-High 0.848 p < 0.001Control-High 0.030 p = 0.902Drift-Control 0.879 p = 0.001
TEP Mesocosm Time Series
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Time (Days)
Med
ian
TE
P (m
g G
um X
anth
an L
-1) Why are the high and control
different from the drift but not each other?
What makes the drift different?
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Time (Days)
Med
ian
TE
P (m
g G
um X
anth
an L
-1)
– How are the biotic factors, such as phytoplankton and bacteria, responding to the treatments?
– How do the abiotic factor differ between treatments?
– Which of these abiotic factors effect the physiological response of these organisms?
Biotic Factor: Phytoplankton
T0 T2 T4 T6 T8 T10
T12
T14
T16
T18
T20
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Time (Days)Med
ian
Chl
orop
hyll
(mg
L-1
)
• Both Chlorophyll a and TEP show the control ending above the high, and increase over time.
• For both the drift treatment is significantly lower than the high treatment.
• Suggest phytoplankton are the main producers of TEP in the system.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Time (Days)Med
ian
TE
P (m
g G
um X
anth
an L
-1)
r
Control 0.837
High 0.851
Drift 0.794
P < 0.001
Biotic Factor: Bacteria
• The control and high treatments are significantly higher than the drift treatment for both Bacterial Abundance and TEP.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Time (Days)Med
ian
TE
P (m
g G
um X
anth
an L
-1)
r
Control 0.882
High 0.754
Drift 0.388
P < 0.03
But why is the drift significantly lower?
• All treatments experienced the same temperature and turbulence conditions
• Initial nutrients were highly similar in all treatments
• The only factor which changed between treatments was the pCO2– Drift was allowed to change whereas High and
Control concentrations were maintained
But why is the drift significantly lower?
DRIFT
But why is the drift significantly lower?
But why is the drift significantly lower?
But why is the drift significantly lower?
Photosynthesis: 106CO2 + 16NO3 + PO4 ORGANIC MATTER + 138O2
But why is the drift significantly lower?
HIGH OR CONTROL
But why is the drift significantly lower?
But why is the drift significantly lower?
But why is the drift significantly lower?
Photosynthesis: 106CO2 + 16NO3 + PO4 ORGANIC MATTER + 138O2
But why is the drift significantly lower?
Photosynthesis: 106CO2 + 16NO3 + PO4 ORGANIC MATTER + 138O2
But why is the drift significantly lower?
Conclusions
• TEP production is affected by repetitive enrichment of waters with CO2
• The ways different factors influence TEP concentrations are complex. Further studies should be completed to ensure a better understand of how TEP functions under ocean acidification conditions.
Acknowledgements• OA apprentices, technicians, and advisors!
– Jim Murray, Evelyn Lessard, Mike Foy, Amanda Fay, Barbara Paul, Kelsey, Amy,
Natsuko, Jennifer, Kiely, Phil, Kelly, Andrew.
• Friday Harbor Labs
• Project Funding:– Educational Foundation of America and the National Science Fund for funding the project
– Alice M. Barger and Andrea Reister for funding my education the past two years
– Mary Gates Research Endowment Fund
• Steve Emerson and Kathy Krogsland for use of their lab equipment at the UW
• My family, partner, friends, and current roommate, Collin, for all of the great support
Works Cited
TEP Mesocosm Time Series
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 210.00
100.00
200.00
300.00
400.00
500.00
600.00
700.00
800.00
Time (Days)
TE
P (m
g G
um X
anth
an L
-1)
Figure 1. Transparent exopolymer particle time series based on median values. Error bars are the median standard deviation Green data represent control mesocosms, red high mesocosms, blue drift mesocosms, and black the dock. Statistically significant differences were found between the drift and high treatment (0.848, p=0.001) and the drift and control treatment (0.879, p=0.000).
Why did TEP peak and then drop in all treatments?
What caused the sudden decreased in
TEP?0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
0.00
100.00
200.00
300.00
400.00
500.00
600.00
700.00
800.00
TE
P (m
g G
um X
anth
an
L-1
)
• Unlikely due to sampling error, present in all bags
• Both Temperature and pCO2 decrease in days prior to TEP decrease– Source says
temperature affects TEP production?
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200
2
4
6
8
10
12
pCO
2
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 207.807.908.008.108.208.308.408.508.608.70
Time (days)
Tem
pera
ture
(°C
)
Biotic Factor: Phytoplankton
• TEP production often associated with maintenance and senescence phase of phytoplankton
• Population of Thalassiosira has growth rates constant and close to zero, suggesting this is a source of TEP
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Time (days)
Gro
wth
Rat
e ( c
ells
days
^-1)
Experimental ResultsWere there any significant differences in TEP production between current water conditions and the predicted future conditions?
What biotic factors was TEP correlated to within our mesocosm?
Why was the drift significantly different from the high and the control, but the high and control were not different from each other?
Why were initial TEP concentrations about zero?
There was no significant difference between TEP production in the control treatment and the high treatment, but the drift treatment was different from the control and high.
TEP is significantly correlated to Chlorophyll a, Biogenic Silica, and Bacteria Abundance.
higher production is most likely associated with the repeatative enrichment of CO2 to the control and high treatments but not the drift
Turbulence during filling of the mesocosms
TEP Mesocosm Time Series
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Time (Days)
Med
ian
TE
P (m
g G
um X
anth
an L
-1) Why doesn’t TEP start at zero?
Why were initial concentrations of TEP above zero?
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Time (Days)
Med
ian
TE
P (m
g G
um X
anth
an L
-1)
• Previous mesocosm studies show increased turbulence results in increased TEP formation in water
• Highly turbulent conditions persistent during mesocosm filling
Biotic Factor: Phytoplankton
0 5 10 15 20 250
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
f(x) = 22.4317339734945 x + 163.092827072178R² = 0.9136486377523
f(x) = 22.6234216283096 x + 152.069867794619R² = 0.742508647762496
f(x) = 21.1550559666342 x + 134.805217331239R² = 0.755077045524911
Median Chlorophyll a (mg L-1)
Med
ian
TE
P (m
g G
um X
anth
an L
-1)
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 140
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
f(x) = 61.230335973375 x − 13.771970581756R² = 0.905318141834004
f(x) = 43.3406556533693 x + 11.0071400800144R² = 0.836035604876101
f(x) = 47.1711280538585 x + 7.03606472309059R² = 0.700042222877542
Median Biogenic Silica (mmol L-1)
Med
ian
TE
P (m
g G
um X
anth
an L
-1)
p < 0.01p < 0.01
Biotic Factor: Bacteria• Two possible reasons for
this correlation:– Bacteria are producing
TEP• Currently no method for
discerning from a bulk value whether TEP is phytoplankton or bacteria derived
– Bacteria are remineralizing TEP• Further information
necessary 5.00E+05 1.00E+06 1.50E+06 2.00E+06 2.50E+06 3.00E+06 3.50E+060
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
f(x) = 0.00017362065764817 x + 28.1966162127956R² = 0.725255960412949f(x) = 0.000306851572870818 x − 89.0666937085923
R² = 0.652842411733566
f(x) = 0.000132378335507074 x + 106.047935049809R² = 0.19061389248151
Median Bacterial Abundance (cell mL-1)
Med
ian
TE
P (m
g G
um X
anth
an L
-1)
p < 0.05