What changes when you warm the Antarctic Ocean just 1 degree? Lots

What changes when you warm the Antarctic Ocean just 1 degree? Lots
This photograph shows a morning commute in Antarctica. Credit: Gail Ashton

After warming a natural seabed in the Antarctic Ocean by just 1° or 2° Celsius, researchers observed massive impacts on a marine assemblage, as growth rates nearly doubled. The findings of what the researchers call the "most realistic ocean warming experiment to date" reported in Current Biology on August 31 show that the effects of future warming may far exceed expectations.

"I was quite surprised," says Gail Ashton of the British Antarctic Survey and Smithsonian Environmental Research Center. "I wasn't expecting a significant observable difference in communities warmed by just 1°C in the Antarctic. I have spent most of my career working in temperate climates where communities experience much greater fluctuations and wasn't expecting such a response to just 1°C of change."

Predicting how organisms and whole communities will respond to climate change in the future remains a major challenge. So, Ashton and her colleagues decided to actually warm an area of seabed around the Rothera Research Station and watch what happened. They deployed heated settlement panels to warm a thin layer of water by 1°C or 2°C above the ambient temperature. Those increases in are expected within the next 50 and 100 years, respectively.

The experiment showed that with a 1°C increase in temperature, a single pioneer of bryozoan (Fenestrulina rugula) took off. That one species ultimately dominated the community, driving a reduction in overall species diversity and evenness within two months. Individuals of a marine worm, Romanchella perrieri, also grew to an average size 70 percent larger than those under ambient conditions, the researchers report.

What changes when you warm the Antarctic Ocean just 1 degree? Lots
Researchers deploying concrete slabs to support the heated settlement panels. Credit: Gail Ashton

The responses of organisms to a 2°C rise in temperature were much more variable. Growth-rate responses to warming differed among species, ages, and seasons. Species generally grew faster with warming through the Antarctic summer. However, different responses among species were observed in March, when both food availability for suspension feeders and declined, the researchers report.

The researchers say the findings suggest that climate change could have even greater effects on polar marine ecosystems than had been anticipated. As the planet warms, there will be winners (like the bryozoan Fenestrulina rugula) and losers.

The researchers say they now plan to expand the use of this technology to investigate the response to warming in other locations and communities, including the Arctic.

What changes when you warm the Antarctic Ocean just 1 degree? Lots
Researchers monitoring heated settlement panels using SCUBA at 15 m depth at Rothera Research Station, Antarctica. Credit: Gail Ashton

Explore further

Zooplankton resilient to long-term warming

More information: Current Biology, Ashton et al.: "Warming by 1°C Drives Species and Assemblage Level Responses in Antarctica's Marine Shallows" http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(17)30952-1 , DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2017.07.048
Journal information: Current Biology

Provided by Cell Press
Citation: What changes when you warm the Antarctic Ocean just 1 degree? Lots (2017, August 31) retrieved 22 September 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2017-08-antarctic-ocean-degree-lots.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
234 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Aug 31, 2017
So which is worse? Climate change due to the variances of the earth and sun or climate change due to humanity?

Aug 31, 2017
Natural changes take hundreds or thousands of years to happen, allowing ecosystems to adapt. Human warming takes decades to force the same amount of change. Which do YOU think is worse?

Aug 31, 2017
Yet, we've not seen the 'predicted' changes from 10-20 years ago. I mean eventually a theory's predictions have to come true or that theory will be proven false. GW will go down as the greatest science/political scam in history.

Aug 31, 2017
Yet, we've not seen the 'predicted' changes from 10-20 years ago. I mean eventually a theory's predictions have to come true or that theory will be proven false. GW will go down as the greatest science/political scam in history.


I agree. The Maldives were predicted to sink by 2010 and yet they have not. If you listen to the rhetoric from the last 20 years you would think they would be under 20' of water by now!

Aug 31, 2017
yes Maldives in fact the very rich have built expensive resorts there right at sea level .

Sep 01, 2017
Yeah, that is why the Maldive have to "build" islands at great expense to keep ahead.

One of those is the City of Hope being built on an artificial island called Hulhumale, near the capital Male. To build it, a state-owned company is pumping sand from surrounding atolls and depositing it on shallow reefs that surround the original lagoon. It is being fortified with walls 3 metres above sea level — which is higher than the highest natural island at only 2.5 metres above the sea.


Eight such islands have already been built, and three more are planned.

https://www.newsc...ng-seas/

Sep 01, 2017
the Maldives government is in the final stages of negotiation with Saudi Arabia to lease Faafu Atoll,
consisting of 23 islands, for development for 99 years.


Why would they do such a thing?

Because they need to prepare places to move people to as lower lying islands become uninhabitable.

Sep 01, 2017
or...maybe they want to build more cash crop tourist resorts at sea level, think about it....

or not.

;-)

Sep 01, 2017
"Predicting how organisms and whole communities will respond to climate change in the future remains a major challenge."

I wonder who is funding this kind of "science" that amounts to just plain bull shit that has no conceivable value to anyone but the ones collecting the research money to dream it up and carry it out.

Below is all one needs to know about the sea Temperature at Antarctica.
1 September 2017 0°C 32°F
https://seatemper...ure.html

Sep 01, 2017
Aren't we being asked to believe that this stupendous sea level rise will come from the Antarctica ice melting?
"Mean Sea Level Trends
999-001 Bahia Esperanza, Antarctica
The mean sea level trend is -4.82 millimeters/year with a 95% confidence
interval of +/- 2.58 mm/yr based on monthly mean sea level data from
1961 to 1993 which is equivalent to a change of -1.58 feet in 100 years."
http://tidesandcu...=999-001


Sep 01, 2017


Don't these people know that The United Arab Emirates has built sand islands in the Persian Gulf & that China is building sand islands in the South China Sea?

"Mean Sea Level Trends
605-041 Quinhon, Vietnam
The mean sea level trend is -1.25 millimeters/year with a 95% confidence
interval of +/- 1.60 mm/yr based on monthly mean sea level data from
1977 to 2006 which is equivalent to a change of -0.41 feet in 100 years."
http://tidesandcu...=605-041


Sep 01, 2017
The conclusions of the article become obvious once one considers how much energy it takes to make that much difference in the temperature of an enormous body of water. It's a billion nuclear weapons. Maybe that will put it in perspective for the #climatecranks. But I kinda doubt it. I doubt they can count to a billion.

I love the smell of burning stupid in the morning.

Sep 01, 2017
I love the smell of burning stupid in the morning.


I really hate the smell that burning, steaming dog dung puts out, especially in the morning. That's all Da Schneib's stupidly irrational comment about "It's a billion nuclear weapons." amounts to. I really wonder if the idiot has ever tried to heat a pan of water by using a heat source from the surface of the water?

NASA Study Finds Earth's Ocean Abyss Has Not Warmed
The cold waters of Earth's deep ocean have not warmed measurably since 2005, according to a new NASA study, leaving unsolved the mystery of why global warming appears to have slowed in recent years.
http://www.jpl.na...ure=4321

Get some facts, you know nothing piece of dog dung, before you spout off.

Sep 02, 2017
No reason to fret it's already too late. The climate has temperature and weather "inertia" of a form.

Even if all hazardous causes were eliminated, you would continue to see a rise in temp for a very long time.

Sep 02, 2017
Are the waters of this study up-welling or sinking water? If up-welling then water temp can only change after 100 years have passed.

Thus there is more life at the bottom of the food chain, therefore more krill and baleen whales. Humans can harvest and eat the surplus krill thus preventing a world overpopulation of baleen whales. We can support perhaps support another 250,000,000 more starving people on earth. Upside

Sep 02, 2017
No reason to fret it's already too late. The climate has temperature and weather "inertia" of a form.

Even if all hazardous causes were eliminated, you would continue to see a rise in temp for a very long time.


One can only wonder with amazement just what syndicate_51 means when they say:
"Even if all hazardous causes were eliminated, you would continue to see a rise in temp for a very long time."
Solar Cycles causing global warming: The SUN & it would take someone who has never opened their eyes and seen it for what it is, to say that it did not have anything to do with the climate.
"Climate changes such as global warming may be due to changes in the sun rather than to the release of greenhouse gases on Earth.
[…] The researchers point out that much of the half-a-degree rise in global temperature over the last 120 years occurred before 1940 - earlier than the biggest rise in greenhouse gas emissions."
http://news.bbc.c...6456.stm


Sep 02, 2017
A 150,000-year climatic record from Antarctic ice
Abstract: "During much of the Quaternary, the Earth's climate has undergone drastic changes most notably successive glacial and interglacial episodes. The past 150 kyr includes such a climatic cycle: the last interglacial, the last glacial and the present holocene interglacial. A new climatic-time series for this period has been obtained using delta18 O data from an Antarctic ice core."
http://www.nature...1a0.html
Effects of bias in solar radiative transfer codes on global climate model simulations
[…] We find the main impact is in the energy exchange terms between the surface and atmosphere and in the convective transport in the lower troposphere, where it exceeds 10 W m-2. The impact on model response to doubling of CO2, on the other hand, is quite small and in most cases negligible.
http://www.agu.or...44.shtml

Sep 02, 2017
Sea level rise is caused by the fact that much of the northern northern hemisphere is rising because it is bouncing up after the depression of glaciers 10000 years ago, not by the BS that ice melting. Ice contracts when it melts. This is a fact conveniently omitted.

Sep 03, 2017
Aaaah TURDgent (aka antigoracle, waterprophet and his riot of sockpuppets getting in on another round of circle jerking (as usual pulling his facts out of book filled with fresh Turd, c'mon numbty, dance some more for us :D

Sep 03, 2017
c'mon numbty, dance some more for us :D


Aaaah Hellforstupid (aka, Antiproof, Neverright) as usual, this ignorant penis licking dud says nothing about the article, "What changes when you warm the Antarctic Ocean just 1 degree? Lots" because the pile of dung doesn't know what it is.
3 September
0°C/32°F
https://seatemper...ure.html

OK, Hellforstupid, if you were bright enough to be able to go to this link you would see that there was zero change in the H₂O temperature for all of Sept, 2016
3 September 2017 0°C 32°F
2 September 2017 0°C 32°F
https://seatemper...ure.html

It is ignorant piles of steaming dung that issue up meaningless "comments" like HeloMenelo that makes everyone who can think know that the idiot alarmist are all mouth and ass with zero in between.

Sep 03, 2017
Now now j-dung puppet (antigoracle sockpuppet) Meaningless sensless and utter stupidity is infinately preached,promoted and illustrated over decades by You and your puppets which is just YOU Those who actually think is the scientists providing countless of Emperical evidence over decades that is too vast for that thick skull to enter to make any logical understanding outside your bubble fantasy world.

Sep 03, 2017
[q Meaningless sensless and utter stupidity

But, you penis licking dud, the question is, why have you not come to understand that this site was supposed to be for discussions of various topics and that there is freedom of speech in this country; therefore, differences of opinions are discussed by people who have IQs in excess of what you are cursed with of 70? What, in your illiterate "comment", suggest that you are capable of having a logical discussion about anything? If "stupidity on this site is never tolerated" then the obvious question is what is an ignorant, dull piece of dung doing on here?

"In general, someone with an IQ of 70 is likely to work a lower-paying, more physically oriented job, and have less success (a lot, as in likely not to finish at all) in school. They are, to be quite blunt, markedly less intelligent than most other people."


Sep 03, 2017
BTW, sensless is spelled "senseless". infinately is spelled "infinitely" & some dud like you thinks you know about "Emperical evidence over decades" is a real show of your bottomless ignorance & boundless stupidity. Emperical is spelled Empirical.

"The growth of knowledge depends entirely on disagreement" Karl Popper

"Our knowledge can only be finite, while our ignorance must necessarily be infinite."
Karl Popper
Got that, Hellforstupid?

Sep 03, 2017
REMINDER FYIs @ALL 'sides':

The dangers and their spatio-temporal evolutionary trajectory during this DE-stabilizing transition phase:

- many buffer sinks/processes (temporarily) HIDE looming/longterm outcomes, eg, more CO2 adversely affects ocean PH levels, more evaporation puts more water into atmosphere, more rains make wet soils even more wet/soggy for longer, etc;

- even 'modest' sea level rises enough to be DANGEROUS, eg, exacerbate confluence of storm surges, river runoffs and storm rains, INTRUDE SALT WATER into fresh water aquifers/otherwise arable land SUB-soils;

- pests and diseases increase widely, infrastructure/transportation etc constantly compromised and made too costly to bear due to the reduced hiatus between events/damage.

CONSIDER: they're just some subtleties/complexities which must not be ignored when discussing 'worst case scenarios' of long term in-action on AGW and its possible REAL consequences being felt even now.

So CO-OPERATE, ok? :)

Sep 03, 2017
Soon there will be a gold rush as nuggets the size of chicken eggs will be laying around just waiting to be picked up.

Sep 04, 2017
Yet, we've not seen the 'predicted' changes from 10-20 years ago. I mean eventually a theory's predictions have to come true or that theory will be proven false. GW will go down as the greatest science/political scam in history.


You're right. When you look at the predictions from even 10 years ago, the current changes are much much worse. That's because we didn't yet have a good enough understand of medium-term global weather systems. Current models are much better.

For example, we were predicting the Arctic be ice free in summer by 2100. It now looks like it'll be as soon as 2040. The melt is far in excess of predictions, as are global temperature rises.

Sep 04, 2017
BTW, sensless is spelled "senseless". infinately is spelled "infinitely" & some dud like you thinks you know about "Emperical evidence over decades" is a real show of your bottomless ignorance & boundless stupidity. Emperical is spelled Empirical.

"The growth of knowledge depends entirely on disagreement" Karl Popper

"Our knowledge can only be finite, while our ignorance must necessarily be infinite."
Karl Popper
Got that, Hellforstupid?


In J Doug's world, Popper argued that science was best contested by yelling 'NO IT'S NOT, YOU'RE LYING' rather than, you know, conducting actual science. Saying "I don't believe you" is not contesting science. It's being a contrarian.

So, since you're a Popperian, outline the areas where you believe we need further evidence and then go and collect that evidence and draw a conclusion. We'll wait.

Sep 05, 2017
Now now J dung monkey swinging the trees is not going to up that iq of yours,nor that chest thumping ;) freedom of speech ? i see only freedom of idiocy from your side, and so does everyone else :D


Sep 05, 2017
We'll wait.


I have a challenge for you leetennant. You need to provide us with the experiment that shows that CO₂ does what some maintain as far as being the driver of the earth's climate. I do not need to be reminded of Tyndall's 1859 lab experiments that do not prove that humanity's CO₂ emissions are warming the planet. In the real world, other factors can influence and outweigh those lab findings and that is why these experiments must deal with the real world and not computer models that do not have the ability to factor in all of the variables that effect the earth's climate. If they cannot provide a verifiable experiment regarding the present amount of CO₂ in the atmosphere and how it effects the climate and creates their anthropogenic global warming, then believing that it does so is akin to believing that Santa Clause is real and you need to be good to get something left under the tree.


Sep 05, 2017
We'll wait.


I have a challenge for you leetennant. You need to provide us with the experiment that shows that CO₂ does what some maintain as far as being the driver of the earth's climate. I do not need to be reminded of Tyndall's 1859 lab experiments that do not prove that humanity's CO₂ emissions are warming the planet. ...


I see, so you're well aware the science is underpinned by 200 years of reproducible experiments in basic physics. You just refuse to accept it. Thanks for allowing the rest of this thread to become aware of your blinkered, contrarian worldview. It puts your comments into context for everybody. No wonder you reject every piece of real world evidence that's put before you.

I'm curious though - with Arctic sea ice down 70%, sea level rises at 20cm, temps above 1 degree, permafrost melting and large-scale weather anomalies wreaking havoc - what evidence would you accept?

Sep 05, 2017
@Shootist.
Soon there will be a gold rush as nuggets the size of chicken eggs will be laying around just waiting to be picked up.
Nice. Not. Appeal to greed/stupidity. Have you considered how many people will be alive to be able to do that once the real serious climate change weather events become even more extreme and back-to-back? Any 'profit' made from 'selling' that gold will probably not cover your expenses trying to simply stay alive (remember the 'gold rushes'; where tools and food costs skyrocketed and all the gold-seekers 'profits' were used up in situ). The only ones who 'got rich' were the exploitative food/tool/gold etc traders. And what chance anyone left alive to 'exploit' anything once climate change become intolerable unless you own and maintain a self-sustaining artificial 'habitat' structure/system that you will be afraid to leave at all, let alone go 'pick up gold nuggets'. RETHINKIT ALL...or your greed/stupidity may be the death of you, mate. :(

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more