the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Effects of pH/pCO2 fluctuation on photosynthesis and fatty acid composition of two marine diatoms, with reference to consequence of coastal acidification
Abstract. Coastal waters are impacted by a range of natural and anthropogenic factors, which superimpose on effects of increasing atmospheric CO2, resulting in dynamically changing seawater carbonate chemistry. Research on influences of dynamic pH/pCO2 on marine ecosystem is still in its infancy, although effects of ocean acidification have been extensively studied. In the present study, we manipulated the culturing pH/pCO2 to investigate physiological performance and fatty acid (FA) composition of two coastal diatoms Skeletonema costatum and Thalassiosira weissflogii in both steady and fluctuating pH/pCO2 regimes. Generally, seawater acidification and pH variability showed neutral or positive effects on specific growth rate, chlorophyll a, and biogenic silica contents of two species. Elevated pCO2 inhibited net photosynthetic rate by 27 % and enhanced mitochondrial respiration rate of S. costatum by 36 % in the steady pH regime, while these rates were unaltered by elevated pCO2 in the fluctuating regime. Elevated pCO2 leaded to 21 % lower saturated FA and twofold increase in polyunsaturated FA proportions of T. weissflogii. Our results indicate that costal acidification could affect primary production in a different way from ocean acidification. Together with the altered nutritional quality of prey for higher trophic levels, coastal acidification might have far-reaching consequence for marine ecosystem functioning.
- Preprint
(1226 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 25 Sep 2024)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2430', Anonymous Referee #1, 16 Aug 2024
reply
The study examined the effects of steady and fluctuating pH/pCO2 conditions on two coastal diatom species, Skeletonema costatum and Thalasiosira weissflogii. The authors found that seawater acidification had neutral or positive impacts on growth, chlorophyll, and silica content. However, elevated pCO2 inhibited photosynthesis and enhanced respiration in S. costatum under steady pH, but not under fluctuating pH. The results suggest coastal acidification can affect primary production and nutritional quality differently from open ocean acidification, with potential consequences for marine ecosystem functioning. The major highlight of this study is it examines the effect of fluctuating pH or pCO2 on the diatom physiology instead of stable pH/pCO2. This aligns better with the situations in the marine environment, which is very helpful to predict the outcome of seawater acidification in the future.
I have a few comments on the manuscript:
Title: Should be fluctuations
Line 15-18: Elevated pCO2 leaded to 21% lower saturated… As this study evaluate both stable and fluctuating pCO2 scenarios. The authors need to clearly explain which scenario they are referring to. The statement in the abstract seems different from the conclusion that “In the present study, the growth and most parameters of two typical coastal diatom were impacted by neither decreased pH nor pH fluctuation…”. Please check.
Line 25: wind forcing—wind
Line 24: carbonate system parameters—seawater chemistry
Line 26: This is a clause, so the period should be changed to a comma. Additionally, the authors have used too many restrictive clauses in the writing process. Too many “which” in the text. “in which they contribute”, “which is supported”, “in which cells show”…
Line 29: Not seem to be, they are.
Line 36: amplitude and high frequency of what?
Line 40: show—have
Line 42: should emphasize “stable” in the sentence. The impacts of fluctuating carbonate chemistry may differ from the effects of a stable decrease in pH and increase in CO2.
Line 44: These studies hinder our understanding of impacts of acidification in coastal regions?
Line 52-55: Were the diatoms acclimated before experiments?
Line 54: artificial seawater. What is the ingredient of the artificial seawater?
Line 58: diluted every three or four days. What were the cell densities in this period? These diatoms are fast-growing species.
Line 60-69: It would be better to clearly explain the rationale behind the choice of pCO2 levels in either the introduction or methods section, such as the amplitude and frequency of the fluctuations, and how they compare to real-world conditions.
Fig.1 This figure only indicates the Target pH of ambient pH/pCO2. What was the measured pH in the culturing medium?
Line 106: Better to convert RPM into g
Line 25: If the species name has been mentioned earlier in the text, the abbreviated name can be used subsequently.
Fig. 7: The treatments are not labeled in the figure.
Line 165-172: If statistics is not marked in the figure 6 and 7. It would be better to state in the text.
Line 186-190: This paragraph appears redundant or repetitive with information presented earlier in the introduction.
Line 191-200: S. costatum is totally ignored here. Any comment for the response of S. costatum to the fluctuating pCO2?
Line 201: What is the specific frequency and how it is compared with the result in this study?
Line 225: Kinds of effect—Various effect
Line 230-235: The authors only focus on the consequences of the altered FA content. But what could be the mechanisms behind the change?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2430-RC1
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
146 | 36 | 15 | 197 | 10 | 14 |
- HTML: 146
- PDF: 36
- XML: 15
- Total: 197
- BibTeX: 10
- EndNote: 14
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1