Coccolithophores 2004
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-662-06278-4_4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Emiliania huxleyi: bloom observations and the conditions that induce them

Abstract: SummaryMost of what is known about the distribution of blooms of Emiliania huxleyi comes from satellite evidence. However, patches of bright water in satellite images are not always E. huxleyi blooms and satellite evidence needs to be verified by in situ sampling in the area. In this article we firstly describe the observational evidence for these blooms in various regions of the global ocean, and then proceed to describe mimicking conditions: the occasional bright waters that are not E. huxleyi blooms. In the… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

13
270
0
3

Year Published

2006
2006
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 278 publications
(286 citation statements)
references
References 70 publications
13
270
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…This finding is consistent with previous observations of a strict dominance of E. huxleyi with low abundances south of the PF (Saavedra-Pellitero et al, 2014;Winter et al, 2014). E. huxleyi is reported to bloom in waters with generally low silicic acid concentration resulting by its consumption by diatoms (Holligan et al, 1983;Townsend et al, 1994;Tyrrell and Merico, 2004). Additionally, this species has been shown to be tolerant to low iron concentration (Brand et al, 1983;Sunda and Huntsman, 1995;Muggli and Harrison, 1997;Findlay and Giraudeau, 2000;Holligan et al, 2010).…”
Section: Seasonality and Magnitude Of The Coccolith Fine Fraction Exportsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…This finding is consistent with previous observations of a strict dominance of E. huxleyi with low abundances south of the PF (Saavedra-Pellitero et al, 2014;Winter et al, 2014). E. huxleyi is reported to bloom in waters with generally low silicic acid concentration resulting by its consumption by diatoms (Holligan et al, 1983;Townsend et al, 1994;Tyrrell and Merico, 2004). Additionally, this species has been shown to be tolerant to low iron concentration (Brand et al, 1983;Sunda and Huntsman, 1995;Muggli and Harrison, 1997;Findlay and Giraudeau, 2000;Holligan et al, 2010).…”
Section: Seasonality and Magnitude Of The Coccolith Fine Fraction Exportsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…The peak concentrations of Emiliania Huxleyi in this study were 4-6×10 6 cells L −1 (Paulino et al, 2008) which is representative of the concentrations found in the North Atlantic and Norwegian Sea (Tyrrell and Merico, 2004). The Delille et al (2005) experiment had much higher concentrations (4-6×10 7 cells L −1 ) more representative of the intense blooms found in the Norwegian Fjords (Tyrrell and Merico, 2004).…”
Section: Calcificationsupporting
confidence: 53%
“…The Delille et al (2005) experiment had much higher concentrations (4-6×10 7 cells L −1 ) more representative of the intense blooms found in the Norwegian Fjords (Tyrrell and Merico, 2004). Extrapolating the Delille et al (2005) calcification response to the PeECE III study cell numbers translates to a predicted reduction in PIC production of 6 µmol kg −1 (1×CO 2 -2×CO 2 treatment).…”
Section: Calcificationmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…huxleyi is the most abundant and widespread coccolithophore species in the modern oceans (Holligan et al, 1983;Balch et al, 1992;Brown and Yoder, 1994). It forms massive annual spring blooms that are detectable from space by satellites and affects global climate and biogeochemical cycles of carbon and sulfur (Hatton et al, 2004;Rost and Riebesell, 2004;Tyrrell and Merico, 2004). E. huxleyi blooms are routinely infected and terminated by specific giant double-stranded DNA coccolithoviruses (Phycodnaviridae) (Bratbak et al, 1993;Brussaard et al, 1996;Schroeder et al, 2002;Wilson et al, 2002;Lehahn et al, 2014), the E. huxleyi virus (EhV), which is part of the nucleocytoplasmic large DNA virus (Asfarviridae, Ascoviridae, Iridoviridae, Marseilleviridae, Megaviridae, Mimiviridae, Pandoraviridae, Phycodnaviridae, Pithoviridae and Poxviridae) clade.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%