Biggest mass extinction caused by global warming leaving ocean animals gasping for breath

December 6, 2018, University of Washington
This illustration shows the percentage of marine animals that went extinct at the end of the Permian era by latitude, from the model (black line) and from the fossil record (blue dots). A greater percentage of marine animals survived in the tropics than at the poles. The color of the water shows the temperature change, with red being most severe warming and yellow less warming. At the top is the supercontinent Pangaea, with massive volcanic eruptions emitting carbon dioxide. The images below the line represent some of the 96 percent of marine species that died during the event. Includes fossil drawings by Ernst Haeckel/Wikimedia; Blue crab photo by Wendy Kaveney/Flickr; Atlantic cod photo by Hans-Petter Fjeld/Wikimedia; Chambered nautilus photo by ©2010 John White/CalPhotos. Credit: Justin Penn and Curtis Deutsch/University of Washington

The largest extinction in Earth's history marked the end of the Permian period, some 252 million years ago. Long before dinosaurs, our planet was populated with plants and animals that were mostly obliterated after a series of massive volcanic eruptions in Siberia.

Fossils in ancient seafloor rocks display a thriving and diverse marine ecosystem, then a swath of corpses. Some 96 percent of marine species were wiped out during the "Great Dying," followed by millions of years when life had to multiply and diversify once more.

What has been debated until now is exactly what made the oceans inhospitable to life—the high acidity of the water, metal and sulfide poisoning, a complete lack of oxygen, or simply higher temperatures.

New research from the University of Washington and Stanford University combines models of ocean conditions and animal metabolism with published lab data and paleoceanographic records to show that the Permian mass extinction in the oceans was caused by that left animals unable to breathe. As temperatures rose and the metabolism of marine animals sped up, the warmer waters could not hold enough oxygen for them to survive.

The study is published in the Dec. 7 issue of Science.

"This is the first time that we have made a mechanistic prediction about what caused the extinction that can be directly tested with the fossil record, which then allows us to make predictions about the causes of extinction in the future," said first author Justin Penn, a UW doctoral student in oceanography.

Researchers ran a climate model with Earth's configuration during the Permian, when the land masses were combined in the supercontinent of Pangaea. Before ongoing volcanic eruptions in Siberia created a greenhouse-gas planet, oceans had temperatures and similar to today's. The researchers then raised greenhouse gases in the model to the level required to make tropical ocean temperatures at the surface some 10 degrees Celsius (20 degrees Fahrenheit) higher, matching conditions at that time.

The model reproduces the resulting dramatic changes in the oceans. Oceans lost about 80 percent of their oxygen. About half the oceans' seafloor, mostly at deeper depths, became completely oxygen-free.

To analyze the effects on marine species, the researchers considered the varying oxygen and temperature sensitivities of 61 modern —including crustaceans, fish, shellfish, corals and sharks—using published lab measurements. The tolerance of modern animals to high temperature and low oxygen is expected to be similar to Permian animals because they had evolved under similar environmental conditions. The researchers then combined the species' traits with the paleoclimate simulations to predict the geography of the extinction.

"Very few stayed in the same habitats they were living in—it was either flee or perish," said second author Curtis Deutsch, a UW associate professor of oceanography.

This roughly 1.5-foot slab of rock from southern China shows the Permian-Triassic boundary. The bottom section is pre-extinction limestone. The upper section is microbial limestone deposited after the extinction. Credit: Jonathan Payne/Stanford University

The model shows the hardest hit were organisms most sensitive to oxygen found far from the tropics. Many species that lived in the tropics also went extinct in the model, but it predicts that high-latitude species, especially those with high oxygen demands, were nearly completely wiped out.

To test this prediction, co-authors Jonathan Payne and Erik Sperling at Stanford analyzed late-Permian fossil distributions from the Paleoceanography Database, a virtual archive of published fossil collections. The fossil record shows where species were before the extinction, and which were wiped out completely or restricted to a fraction of their former habitat.

The confirms that species far from the equator suffered most during the event.

"The signature of that kill mechanism, climate warming and oxygen loss, is this geographic pattern that's predicted by the model and then discovered in the fossils," Penn said. "The agreement between the two indicates this mechanism of climate warming and oxygen loss was a primary cause of the extinction."

The study builds on previous work led by Deutsch showing that as oceans warm, marine animals' metabolism speeds up, meaning they require more oxygen, while warmer water holds less. That earlier study shows how warmer oceans push animals away from the tropics.

The new study combines the changing ocean conditions with various animals' metabolic needs at different temperatures. Results show that the most severe effects of oxygen deprivation are for species living near the poles.

"Since tropical organisms' metabolisms were already adapted to fairly warm, lower-oxygen conditions, they could move away from the tropics and find the same conditions somewhere else," Deutsch said. "But if an organism was adapted for a cold, oxygen-rich environment, then those conditions ceased to exist in the shallow oceans."

The so-called "dead zones" that are completely devoid of oxygen were mostly below depths where species were living, and played a smaller role in the survival rates."At the end of the day, it turned out that the size of the dead zones really doesn't seem to be the key thing for the extinction," Deutsch said. "We often think about anoxia, the complete lack of oxygen, as the condition you need to get widespread uninhabitability. But when you look at the tolerance for low oxygen, most organisms can be excluded from seawater at oxygen levels that aren't anywhere close to anoxic."

Warming leading to insufficient explains more than half of the marine diversity losses. The authors say that other changes, such as acidification or shifts in the productivity of photosynthetic organisms, likely acted as additional causes.

The situation in the late Permian—increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere that create warmer temperatures on Earth—is similar to today.

"Under a business-as-usual emissions scenarios, by 2100 warming in the upper will have approached 20 percent of warming in the late Permian, and by the year 2300 it will reach between 35 and 50 percent," Penn said. "This study highlights the potential for a mass extinction arising from a similar mechanism under anthropogenic climate change."

Explore further: Volcanic eruptions once caused mass extinctions in the oceans – could climate change do the same?

More information: J.L. Penn el al., "Temperature-dependent hypoxia explains biogeography and severity of end-Permian marine mass extinction," Science (2018). science.sciencemag.org/cgi/doi … 1126/science.aat1327

Related Stories

Warmer, lower-oxygen oceans will shift marine habitats

June 4, 2015

Modern mountain climbers typically carry tanks of oxygen to help them reach the summit. It's the combination of physical exertion and lack of oxygen at high altitudes that creates one of the biggest challenges for mountaineers.

Recommended for you

Machine learning-detected signal predicts time to earthquake

December 18, 2018

Machine-learning research published in two related papers today in Nature Geoscience reports the detection of seismic signals accurately predicting the Cascadia fault's slow slippage, a type of failure observed to precede ...

36 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

szore88
1.2 / 5 (25) Dec 06, 2018
Climate 'scientists' are a proven bunch of liars. Marxist shills trying to take over the world. Good thing we have our guns.
jonesdave
4.5 / 5 (22) Dec 06, 2018
Climate 'scientists' are a proven bunch of liars. Marxist shills trying to take over the world. Good thing we have our guns.


Yep, guns in the hands of rednecks with the IQ of a f***ing badger! How reassuring.
V4Vendicar
1.6 / 5 (19) Dec 06, 2018
Civil WAR IS COMING and those with the guns are going to win against the Commie Scientists.

Trump is a genius and a hero of American Capitalism.

MAGA! Trump 2020.
Da Schneib
4.8 / 5 (16) Dec 06, 2018
And if you "win" you will die of starvation or thirst.
leetennant
4.7 / 5 (13) Dec 06, 2018
Civil WAR IS COMING and those with the guns are going to win against the Commie Scientists.

Trump is a genius and a hero of American Capitalism.

MAGA! Trump 2020.


Poe's Law
guptm
4.3 / 5 (12) Dec 06, 2018
I am amazed to see the stupidity and lack of knowledge people have on the climate facts in this information age. Education is still expensive it seems, or maybe it's the reluctance to learn about how the earth works.

To all the ignorant ones, learn to trust what scholars say; scientists who spend all their lives in understanding the complex nature of earth. Or learn science yourself, but you do nothing except...
guptm
3.7 / 5 (3) Dec 06, 2018
I am amazed to see the stupidity and lack of knowledge people have on the climate facts in this information age. Education is still expensive it seems, or maybe it's the reluctance to learn about how the earth works.

To all the ignorant ones, learn to trust what scholars say; scientists who spend all their lives in understanding the complex nature of earth. Or learn science yourself, but you do nothing except...
guptm
5 / 5 (6) Dec 06, 2018
Sorry everyone. I don't know how Phys.org allowed flooding text within 3 mins!!
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
1.4 / 5 (11) Dec 06, 2018
Climate 'scientists' are a proven bunch of liars. Marxist shills trying to take over the world. Good thing we have our guns.


Yep, guns in the hands of rednecks with the IQ of a f***ing badger! How reassuring.

says jones

Well now, of course you would much rather have those guns taken from those "rednecks" who would be trying to defend their country from the Socialist anarchists - and you would prefer to give those guns TO the Socialist anarchists who are now attempting to destroy the US/America that the founding fathers had intended as a democratic Republic; so for YOU, the Socialist/anarchists will be able to give Communism another chance. Communism didn't work out well in Russia after over 70 years of murderous dictatorships.

Having been born and raised in the UK, I now see the value in being armed and prepared for the event of a Socialist/Marxist/Communist takeover of the US.
English citizens of the UK gave up their guns and are now at the mercy of ...
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
1.4 / 5 (9) Dec 06, 2018
Civil WAR IS COMING and those with the guns are going to win against the Commie Scientists.

Trump is a genius and a hero of American Capitalism.

MAGA! Trump 2020.
says V4V

It isn't the scientists that are so much Communist - it is the politicians who are eager for the cash flow to come into their coffers from richer nations so that the politicians can pretend to share those moneys with the poor and downtrodden of poorer countries while the politicians in those poorer countries get rich and fat from the cash flow into their own coffers.
The poor and downtrodden will never see that money except from charitable orgs who volunteer their time and services.
Politicians are mostly a greedy lot and most cannot be trusted. And climate scientists depend on those politicians for funding and support since Climatology and Climate science are not of such great importance, and have been proven to sometimes tell lies to seem more relevant.
Where is the hockey-stick guy?
Da Schneib
4.8 / 5 (16) Dec 06, 2018
People this is about discovering what happened in the Permian Extinction. In case you hadn't figured it out yet, no number of guns is going to change it.
Bongstar420
4.5 / 5 (8) Dec 06, 2018
What is up with all the derps confusing climate science with economic theory in the 1800's never mind they don't even get the economic theory right. At least they protect rich people from the big bad government that is owned by the rich.

Anyways, global warming was caused...it isn't the cause
Double Derp!

You just wait. These next 50 years are going to be special. Volcano's will be blowing a lot of minds.
howhot3
4.6 / 5 (9) Dec 06, 2018
A pug-faced dipshit say;
Climate 'scientists' are a proven bunch of liars.
Really. Prove it!
Good thing we have our guns.
. Sounds like you need to cool your jets man. Your just an ass that thinks like one.
Da Schneib
4.5 / 5 (11) Dec 06, 2018
Lying for what? Their pitiful salaries?
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
1.4 / 5 (10) Dec 06, 2018
A pug-faced dipshit say;
Climate 'scientists' are a proven bunch of liars.
Really. Prove it!
Good thing we have our guns.


https://www.teleg...ion.html
Da Schneib
4.6 / 5 (11) Dec 06, 2018
@SEU is capering. Trolls always do it for attention.

Sorry, I have nothing to say to psychotics who see rape machines in the bushes and bloviate about how the lizard people are monitoring us telepathically.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
1.4 / 5 (11) Dec 06, 2018
"Professor Philip Jones, the CRU's director, is in charge of the two key sets of data used by the IPCC to draw up its reports. Through its link to the Hadley Centre, part of the UK Met Office, which selects most of the IPCC's key scientific contributors, his global temperature record is the most important of the four sets of temperature data on which the IPCC and governments rely – not least for their predictions that the world will warm to catastrophic levels unless trillions of dollars are spent to avert it.
Dr Jones is also a key part of the closely knit group of American and British scientists responsible for promoting that picture of world temperatures conveyed by Michael Mann's "hockey stick" graph which...."

- unless trillions of dollars are spent to avert it -
LOL The Italian Mafia and the Mexican drug cartels couldn't do much better than that.
howhot3
4.7 / 5 (12) Dec 06, 2018
@S_Egg_unit posts a link to a comment from the tele. It's sucks to be wrong doesn't it S_Egg_unit? Don't worry, we know the fish won't die from global warming; you'll protect them;

"Thousands of dead fish have now washed up on shore along the coast of South Carolina. Today the NRA said that this wouldn't have happened if those fish had guns."

Jay Leno, So true.

Surveillance_Egg_Unit
1.4 / 5 (10) Dec 06, 2018
LOL Jay Leno used to be funny. Now, all his new dialogues are just pitiful. Sad
howhot3
4.3 / 5 (6) Dec 06, 2018
We produce 48% more carbon emissions than we did in the 1970s but that figure could be halved if we just divide it by two.
FredJose
1.3 / 5 (16) Dec 07, 2018
The great worldwide flood offers a much more cogent explanation for all the observed facts.
The bible clearly states that the fountains of the deep burst open - which must have released tremendous amounts of heated water onto the earth's surface. This could have been accompanied by a great multitude of volcanic outbursts which would account for a lot of the type of chemistry observed. It would also be a great explanation for the dinosaurs death pose.

One thing is for sure and that is that the great flood is the only true explanation for the sedimentary burial of more than 90% of fossils. A recent Australian study showed that the amount of sediment required to bury crocodiles cannot be carried by most of any local floods today. So there had to have been gigantic flooding of biblical proportions to carry enough sediment to bury all those really large animals quickly enough to fossilize their remains - and this all around the world in the same layers.
greenonions1
4.6 / 5 (11) Dec 07, 2018
The great worldwide flood offers a much more cogent explanation for all the observed facts
Well Fred - can you tell us when the great flood occurred? What are your qualifications in terms of making comment on a subject as complex as the fossil record. I have none - so would never try to contradict the scientific consensus (read any basic college text on a subject such as evolution to find that). My understanding is that science is able to identify the age of rocks through multiple means. Then an incredibly complex jigsaw is created - looking at the age of rocks from all over the world - and the fossils that appear in those rocks. Seems that rocks that are older than 245 million years old - don't have any dinosaur bones in them. Rocks from the Mesozoic era have dinosaur bones - but no mammals.

Can you splain that - with links please...
UKCatFan
4.6 / 5 (7) Dec 07, 2018
Just to show how different outlets report the same thing, consider this story. It is great scientific work where the primary objective was to study what happened long ago during that extinction event. The primary purpose was not to send warning flares up and cry that the end is near. In this article, there is the one small quote at the end. In the Science News article, there is not one reference to applying to anything current. The NYP article was linking the research to current conditions in the 2nd sentence!!! This is why it is always important to read about science from science sites, not MSM. When possible, it is also a good idea to read original abstracts and related info.
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (3) Dec 07, 2018
@UKCatFan
In this article, there is the one small quote at the end. In the Science News article, there is not one reference to applying to anything current
erm... slight correction:
the quote at the end of this article refers to the quote in the conclusions of the Structured Abstract in Science Mag
These results highlight the future extinction risk arising from a depletion of the ocean's aerobic capacity that is already under way
likely that is why it is in the above article which is actually just a University of Washington auto-post

http://www.washin...-breath/

This is why it is always important to read about science from science sites
*absolutely true*

especially here on phys.org!
dudester
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 07, 2018
In effect, the non-living, cyclical processes of this planet led to a sequestering of massive amounts of carbon from this massive extinction event, called the Permian and associated with large oil deposits made up of that carbon. When those same non-living cyclical processes-- along with carbon based life forms-- eventually "cleared" the other greenhouse factors a new equilibrium was reached in which life could once again thrive and radiate into new forms.

In effect, by burning that oil, and reintroducing that ancient sequestered carbon from all those wiped out species, we are, figuratively speaking, adding more water (carbon) to the bathtub (atmosphere and oceans) than can effectively go down the drain (be sequestered by sedimentation and tectonic processes like subduction) and so the bathtub (earth) is overflowing with water (carbon) which is fine if you like a ruined floor and foundation but not so good if you don't. It's really quite simple.
eachus
2.3 / 5 (3) Dec 07, 2018
To all the ignorant ones, learn to trust what scholars say; scientists who spend all their lives in understanding the complex nature of earth. Or learn science yourself, but you do nothing except...

Unfortunately, someone calling themselves a scientist is usually followed by dogma that has nothing to do with the scientific method. Mathematicians do have proofs. Real scientists run around looking for experiments that disagree with current theories, and propose new theories in their place. (I'm a statistician who did a lot of computer science before retiring.)

My interest in this article was the theory that volcanic eruptions can raise global temperatures. Explosive volcanoes cause reductions in global temperatures. Non-explosive volcanoes may raise global temperatures, but I have seen no evidence. (To be fair trying to sort the effects of Hawaiian type eruptions from other global effects would be difficult. Of course, that is the kind of statistics I like.)
torbjorn_b_g_larsson
5 / 5 (5) Dec 07, 2018
So ... yes, we do not want the 3 K that the world is running towards.

our guns


Are you threatening people instead of discussing the science? And why, we are threatened enough, see the science here.

great worldwide flood


Could not and did not happen, see any basic Geology 101 text..

@dudester: Sorry, downvoted by accident due to to troll fatigue.

torbjorn_b_g_larsson
5 / 5 (5) Dec 07, 2018
Unfortunately, someone calling themselves a scientist is usually followed by dogma that has nothing to do with the scientific method. Mathematicians do have proofs. Real scientists run around looking for experiments that disagree with current theories, and propose new theories in their place. (I'm a statistician who did a lot of computer science before retiring.)


That is not how scientists behave (no dogmatic claims, except when warranted - Crick's Central Dogma, universal speed limit exceptions), and that is not how science works. If competition eliminates all contenders, there is a robust, potentially eternal fact. For example, we know that water is one oxygen and two hydrogen and that will never change.

volcanic eruptions


Not really, the Siberian Traps were (IIRC) hot spot eruptions under/at sediments with oil shale and what not. See Wikipedia for refs to evidence, it is fairly robust as is the connection to the Great Dying.
eachus
not rated yet Dec 07, 2018
It's really quite simple.


There was a recent report: http://iopscience...98d/meta on how to reduce or even reverse global warming by injecting sulfur into the stratosphere. The cost ($2.25 billion/year) is extremely low compared to other proposals for limiting or eliminating global warming.

That should change the conversation to what temperature do we want for Earth. There is also the issue of whether increased atmospheric CO2 levels are causing human health issues. I think we need (scientific) studies on that issue.

There is also the issue of long term supplies of electricity. If you study the issue, you would know that for base load electric supply the only reasonable options going forward are hydro, natural gas co-generation, and nuclear. The nuclear needs to be much safer than that of fifty years ago--I favor molten salt reactors whether fueled with uranium or thorium.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
1.7 / 5 (6) Dec 07, 2018
We produce 48% more carbon emissions than we did in the 1970s but that figure could be halved if we just divide it by two.
says howhot3

By "we". I assume that you mean all of humanity - along with all other Oxygen breathers who also produce CO2 emissions simply by exhaling - something which is known by science to be a necessity.
Now that there are approximately 6 billion Souls living on this planet, not counting all other life forms, both domesticated and wild - do tell which part of that 48% divided by 2 should be killed off to bring the carbon emissions back to what it was in the 1970s. For, if you don't have them killed off - they will surely continue to emit CO2 in their exhalations.

Now that it is wintertime, would you prefer that folks in cold climates cease their usage of fossil fuels to warm their homes; perhaps getting around by horse and buggy - with the horse also emitting CO2? Shoot the horse, since it is also contributing to "global warming"?
eachus
5 / 5 (2) Dec 07, 2018
For example, we know that water is one oxygen and two hydrogen and that will never change.

Except it changed twice in the last century. First, to protons, neutrons, and electrons, then replacing the protons and neutrons with quarks and gluons. Did this eliminate the nineteenth century view? Not really, but it created a new field (nuclear physics) where atoms could be changed from one element to another. This is the sense in which science is never final.

Not really, the Siberian Traps were (IIRC) hot spot eruptions under/at sediments with oil shale and what not. ...it is fairly robust as is the connection to the Great Dying.

Hot spots produce volcanoes. It is thought that the hot spot that produced these Traps is now under Iceland. The idea that the hot spot resulted from an asteroid or comet strike on the other side of the earth is still controversial. Personally, I think the nickel and palladium in the Siberian Traps argues for a local impact.
zeevk
1 / 5 (2) Dec 07, 2018
the deep earth farts, and the surface chokes killing much life . primitive and rock living life is probably well addapted to this. oh, the privilieges of oxygen metabolism come with some risks!!!
antigoracle
1 / 5 (4) Dec 08, 2018
We produce 48% more carbon emissions than we did in the 1970s but that figure could be halved if we just divide it by two.

howhot3 aka... howShat Da Turd, brays again.
This is the jackass who rode into NYC, spewing CO2 all the way, just to snort the methane emanating from the rectum of his False "Profit", Al Gore.
Keep braying at the heretics, jackass. You'll save the world.
granville583762
1 / 5 (1) Dec 08, 2018
The perils of climate change

These gun toting Americans
in total belief
of imminent doom
in calamitous global warming
in total unsubstantiated fear
of calamities calamity
run a mock
in uncontrollable riotous riot
in gun toting riot
in body count most dire
as when the exhausted remaining few survivors struggle home
as they wake the coming morn
as they look at the body strewn streets
the burning cars
the dereliction
they stop
and
admire the rising sun
its golden rays
light the war torn scene in solar beauty
as we look at this miraculous transformation
repeated once again
as it has for 4.5billion years
we realise
to our horror
to our dismay
on
realisation
of
the
fact
this latest global scare
was only a simulation
This Christmas festive season
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (2) Dec 08, 2018
Sorry but nobody wants to hear about how jebus made the Permian Extinction or how it never happened. Why don't you trolls fuuck off to some jebus and conspiracy site or something?
alwaysagentleman
5 / 5 (1) Dec 16, 2018
All models are wrong. Some are useful.

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

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.