Climate change and the timing, magnitude, and composition of the phytoplankton spring bloom

Sommer, Ulrich; Lengfellner, Kathrin

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01571.x

Cited by 249 publications

(220 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

198

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Warming conditions may to an extent advance the timing of the spring bloom; however, the advance in timing will be constrained by the seasonal availability of light. Warming conditions may also shift the species composition of spring blooms from siliceous forms to species adapted to changing climate conditions (Sommer and Lengfellner, 2008;Winder and Sommer, 2012). Though there is an expectation that micro-zooplankton diversity, abundance, and trophic function will also change in response to climate change, the main focus of climate change impact studies has been on primary production, with less accomplished to date to evaluate the impact of climate on secondary production (Caron and Hutchins, 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spring bloom dynamics and zooplankton biomass response on the US Northeast Continental Shelf

Friedland

Leaf

Kane

et al. 2015

Continental Shelf Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe spring phytoplankton bloom on the US Northeast Continental Shelf is a feature of the ecosystem production cycle that varies annually in timing, spatial extent, and magnitude. To quantify this variability, we analyzed remotely-sensed ocean color data at two spatial scales, one based on ecologically defined sub-units of the ecosystem (production units) and the other on a regular grid (0.5°). Five units were defined: Gulf of Maine East and West, Georges Bank, and Middle Atlantic Bight North and South. The units averaged 47 Â 10 3 km 2 in size. The initiation and termination of the spring bloom were determined using change-point analysis with constraints on what was identified as a bloom based on climatological bloom patterns. A discrete spring bloom was detected in most years over much of the western Gulf of Maine production unit. However, bloom frequency declined in the eastern Gulf of Maine and transitioned to frequencies as low as 50% along the southern flank of the Georges Bank production unit. Detectable spring blooms were episodic in the Middle Atlantic Bight production units. In the western Gulf of Maine, bloom duration was inversely related to bloom start day; thus, early blooms tended to be longer lasting and larger magnitude blooms. We view this as a phenological mismatch between bloom timing and the "top-down" grazing pressure that terminates a bloom. Estimates of secondary production were available from plankton surveys that provided spring indices of zooplankton biovolume. Winter chlorophyll biomass had little effect on spring zooplankton biovolume, whereas spring chlorophyll biomass had mixed effects on biovolume. There was evidence of a "bottom up" response seen on Georges Bank where spring zooplankton biovolume was positively correlated with the concentration of chlorophyll. However, in the western Gulf of Maine, biovolume was uncorrelated with chlorophyll concentration, but was positively correlated with bloom start and negatively correlated with magnitude. This observation is consistent with both a "top-down" mechanism of control of the bloom and a "bottom-up" effect of bloom timing on zooplankton grazing. Our inability to form a consistent model of these relationships across adjacent systems underscores the need for further research.Published by Elsevier Ltd.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spring bloom dynamics and zooplankton biomass response on the US Northeast Continental Shelf

Friedland

Leaf

Kane

et al. 2015

Continental Shelf Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, the timing, duration and magnitude of phytoplankton blooms is defined by the impact of temperature on the physical environment (e.g. MLD, light, nutrients) but the nature and magnitude of this effect differs among taxa (Sommer and Lengfellner, 2008;Sommer and Lewandowska, 2011). Temperature also affects the timing of phytoplankton blooms by triggering the formation and germination of phytoplankton resting stages (McQuoid and Hobson, 1995).…”

Section: Temperaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Southern Ocean phytoplankton physiology in a changing climate

Petrou

Kranz

Trimborn

et al. 2016

Journal of Plant Physiology

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Please cite this article in press as: Petrou, K., et al., Southern Ocean phytoplankton physiology in a changing climate. J Plant Physiol (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2016.05.004 ARTICLE IN PRESS a b s t r a c tThe Southern Ocean (SO) is a major sink for anthropogenic atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), potentially harbouring even greater potential for additional sequestration of CO 2 through enhanced phytoplankton productivity. In the SO, primary productivity is primarily driven by bottom up processes (physical and chemical conditions) which are spatially and temporally heterogeneous. Due to a paucity of trace metals (such as iron) and high variability in light, much of the SO is characterised by an ecological paradox of high macronutrient concentrations yet uncharacteristically low chlorophyll concentrations. It is expected that with increased anthropogenic CO 2 emissions and the coincident warming, the major physical and chemical process that govern the SO will alter, influencing the biological capacity and functioning of the ecosystem. This review focuses on the SO primary producers and the bottom up processes that underpin their health and productivity. It looks at the major physico-chemical drivers of change in the SO, and based on current physiological knowledge, explores how these changes will likely manifest in phytoplankton, specifically, what are the physiological changes and floristic shifts that are likely to ensue and how this may translate into changes in the carbon sink capacity, net primary productivity and functionality of the SO.

show abstract

“…Under these conditions, spring blooms are triggered by correlated increases in temperature and seasonal light availability (Edwards and Richardson 2004;Peeters et al 2007;Winder and Schindler 2004). In shallow, well-mixed systems, phytoplankton blooms are strongly coupled to the external light regime that is influenced by ice cover, cloud cover or day length, and can occur independently of temperature change (Adrian et al 1999;Sommer and Lengfellner 2008). In both deep and shallow systems, increasing temperature and food availability trigger population growth of zooplankton that in turn can feed back on phytoplankton bloom dynamics through tight trophic coupling (Sommer and Lewandowska 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Mesocosm experiments have been identified as a tool for studying the underlying mechanisms (Berger et al 2007;McKee and Atkinson 2000;Sommer et al 2007). Such experiments in marine and freshwater systems have yielded diverse patterns of phytoplankton and zooplankton bloom development in response to altered temperature and light supply Berger et al 2010;Lewandowska and Sommer 2010;Sommer and Lengfellner 2008). Yet, responses across systems and trophic levels have never been compared in a systematic way.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spring phenological responses of marine and freshwater plankton to changing temperature and light conditions

et al. 2012

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Shifts in the timing and magnitude of the spring plankton bloom in response to climate change have been observed across a wide range of aquatic systems. We used meta-analysis to investigate phenological responses of marine and freshwater plankton communities in mesocosms subjected to experimental manipulations of temperature and light intensity. Systems differed with respect to the dominant mesozooplankton (copepods in seawater and daphnids in freshwater). Higher water temperatures advanced the bloom timing of most functional plankton groups in both marine and freshwater systems. In contrast to timing, responses of bloom magnitudes were more variable among taxa and systems and were influenced by light intensity and trophic interactions. Increased light levels increased the magnitude of the spring peaks of most phytoplankton taxa and of total phytoplankton biomass. Intensified size-selective grazing of copepods in warming scenarios affected phytoplankton size structure and lowered intermediate (20-200 lm)-sized phytoplankton in marine systems. In contrast, plankton peak magnitudes in freshwater systems were unaffected by temperature, but decreased at lower light intensities, suggesting that filter feeding daphnids are sensitive to changes in algal carrying capacity as mediated by light supply. Our analysis confirms the general shift toward earlier blooms at increased temperature in both marine and freshwater systems and supports predictions that effects of climate change on plankton production will vary among sites, depending on resource limitation and species composition.

show abstract

Climate change and the timing, magnitude, and composition of the phytoplankton spring bloom

Cited by 249 publications

References 48 publications

Spring bloom dynamics and zooplankton biomass response on the US Northeast Continental Shelf

Spring bloom dynamics and zooplankton biomass response on the US Northeast Continental Shelf

Southern Ocean phytoplankton physiology in a changing climate

Spring phenological responses of marine and freshwater plankton to changing temperature and light conditions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About