Giant squid in full HD!!

A week ago the Discovery Channel announced that it had footage of a giant squid that it would be releasing in January 2013! It could be the first video footage ever captured of a live giant squid in its natural habitat. Previous footage of a live giant squid has been taken at the surface after the squid was caught. In 2005 and Japanese team lead by Tsunemi Kubodera and Kyoichi Mori took the first still images of a giant squid attacking a baited line. The next year a team lead bu Kubodera caught a small female squid using a similar method and filmed it as it was brought into their boat.

A giant squid attacking a baited line (photo Kubodera & Mori)

I'm guessing that Kubodera is involved again, but other researchers may have used similar methods to get this latest footage. Basically, look for where sperm whales are diving, drop a baited line down a few hundred meters with a camera on it and wait. Easy!...

Shifting baselines in coral cover

A great problem for conserving marine ecosystems is that we rarely have a good data on what things were like before human impacts started. In my last post, I wrote about a study that showed that coral cover had declined on the Great Barrier Reef by 50.7% since 1985. At the start of the study coral cover was at 28%, but pristine coral reefs can have over 70% coral cover. This suggests that impacts on the Great Barrier Reef predate the time monitoring started by many years.

A coral outcrop on the Great Barrier Reef (photo Wikipedia)

John Pandolfi at the University of Queensland has been trying to establish the past state of the Great Barrier Reef in numerous ways. One way is to take sediment cores from coral reef and compare the historical diversity and abundance of corals on the reef to the modern community composition. A new study lead by Pandolfi has reconstructed the past coral communities on reefs around Pelorus Island in the Palm Island group. They took cores containing coral remains dating back as far as the mid-third century.

They found that there was a pronounced transition in the coral species on the islands reefs between 1920 and 1955. The transition strongly correlated with a 5 to 10 fold increase in the amount of sediment found in the cores beginning in 1870, but showing several large peaks between the 1920s and 1970s. White settlement and land clearing of the area began in about 1870, the same time that high sediment loads were found in the cores. Prior to that, there was remarkable stability in the coral communities and the amount of sediment reaching the reef.

The new study highlights that reefs in 1985 that were thought to be relatively pristine probably had not been for 50 or 60 years. Therefore attempts to conserve reefs as they were in 1985 is inadequate because these reefs are likely to be already severely impacted by human activities. If we a serious about returning coral reefs to a pristine state, we should be restoring them to what they were like prior to white settlement, not what they were like now after a century of mistreatment.

Roff, G., Clark, T., Reymond, C., Zhao, J., Feng, Y., McCook, L., Done, T., & Pandolfi, J. (2012). Palaeoecological evidence of a historical collapse of corals at Pelorus Island, inshore Great Barrier Reef, following European settlement Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 280 (1750), 20122100-20122100 DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2012.2100

Conservation priorities on the Great Barrier Reef

A recently published paper on the decline of coral cover on the Great Barrier Reef serves to illustrate an important point; even without climate change we are doing a great deal of damage to some ecosystems. The study by De'ath et al. and published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, finds that coral cover has declined by 50.7% since 1985. They partitioned the losses into 48% tropical cyclones, 42% predation by crown of thorns starfish and 10% to coral bleaching.

The crown of thorns starfish, Acanthaster planci (image Wikipedia)

The declines were not uniform across the reef. Most of the declines were in the southern part of the reef and near to shore, where more people live. Partly this may be due to more frequent storms in the southern part of the reef, but storm frequency has declined in the last 100 years or so. Mostly it's probably because outbreaks of crown of thorns starfish are linked to human activities, such as agriculture and fishing. And these same human activities leave coral less resilient to other impacts and make it more difficult for them to recover from disturbances.

Pollution, sedimentation and overfishing can all change the dynamics of coral reef communities by impairing the ability of corals to recover from other disturbances. Human activities can also increase the mortality of adult coral and reduce the number larvae that survive to become coral. Shifts from coral-dominated communities to seaweed-dominated communities due to these impacts are well documented.

Overfishing, particularly of herbivorous fish, has been strongly linked to shifts in community composition. In direct competition corals lose out to seaweed, which overgrows coral and in some cases uses toxins to kill the coral. Herbivorous fish though, eat the seaweed tipping the balance in favour of the corals. So important are herbivorous fish to corals that some have formed mutualistic relationships with fish, which they signal for help when seaweeds encroach on their space. 

Overfishing has also been suggested to reduce predation on larvae of the crown of thorns starfish, allowing it to reach plague proportions when fish would normally control their numbers. A second hypothesis is that nutrient inputs from farms and cities provides the crown of thorns larvae with large amounts of food, increasing their survival. Neither hypothesis is well supported, but there is growing evidence that both mechanisms are playing a role in crown of thorns outbreaks. 

For corals, like seagrasses, access to light is critical for their survival. Coral derive as much as 90% of their energy from symbiotic algae growing in their tissues. Nutrient inputs and sedimentation reduce the light available to their algal symbionts, which reduces the energy available to them. This can decrease the resilience of corals to other stressors, such as natural disturbance events. The main sources of sedimentation on the Great Barrier Reef are from human activities, such as agricultural run-off and dredging.  

De'ath et al. conclude that there is an urgent need to control crown of thorns outbreaks, especially through improvements to water quality. In the absence of disturbances, the data showed that reefs were able to increase in cover by nearly 3% per year. This is likely to be higher when the full impact of human activities are taken into account. Moreover, their data only go back to 1985, but human impacts on the reef date back to about 100 years before that. The true decline of coral cover on the Great Barrier Reef is, therefore, likely to be far greater than that measured in their study.

De'ath et al. also highlight the impending effects of climate change and ocean acidification. Many people are focused on human emissions of carbon dioxide as the sole problem we need to fix to save the reef. But, it's clear that even without the threats of climate change and ocean acidification the Great Barrier Reef is in great deal of trouble. In order to conserve the reef we need to address the source of these issues now.

De'ath, G., Fabricius, K., Sweatman, H., & Puotinen, M. (2012). The 27-year decline of coral cover on the Great Barrier Reef and its causes Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109 (44), 17995-17999 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1208909109

Everyone loves bacon

Researchers at the VENUS Observatory put a pig carcass in 300 meters of water and watched to see what came to eat it. Mostly amphipod crustaceans, it would seem.

Results vary only slightly when the carcass is not in a cage. The wounds that appear early in the video are caused by sharks, I'm pretty sure.

All the better to carry you with

Over at Why Evolution is True, Mathew Cobb makes fun of adaptationist "just-so stories" about a beetle that evolved handles so that it could be more conveniently carried by termites. It's definitely worth a read.

More on the iron fertilisation "experiment"

A little while ago I wrote a post on the actions of Russ George, a businessman who has been trying to sell ocean iron fertilisation as a viable method for reducing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. His arguments about the success of such schemes are way out in front of the science required to support them. He released 100 tons of iron sulfate into the north-eastern Pacific in what he calls an experiment, but what nearly all other pundits have been calling an irresponsible and reckless action.

His supporters have rallied behind him though and have had a presence in nearly every comment thread of prominent science news sites that have covered the issue. So, I thought I would take some time to put my views on the potential dangers of large-scale fertilisation of the ocean with iron.

Phytoplankton is not only reliant on iron to survive. There are several other important nutrients that limit phytoplankton numbers in areas where iron is abundant, such as phosphorous. Large blooms of phytoplankton that are produced by the addition of iron could rapidly deplete other limiting nutrients. Once the bloom has consumed the added iron and collapsed the population may not recover back to what it was prior to the bloom because it is limited by more than iron. 

When the bloom dies and decomposes, it could reduce a molecule that is highly important to a great many marine organisms, oxygen. Areas of the ocean that become so low in oxygen that they are no longer able to support life and know as dead zones. The appearance and expansion of dead zones is often caused in areas where human inputs of important nutrients, such as phosphorus and nitrogen, increases the abundance of phytoplankton. The bacteria that consume the dead phytoplankton also consume the dissolved oxygen, depleting it to levels dangerously low for many other organisms.

The rain of dead phytoplankton could also have serious effects on the seafloor community beneath. Indeed, one of my very first posts on this blog was about how the energy balance in the deep sea was critical to maintaining a high diversity of species in an energy poor, seemingly homogenous environment. A huge input of nutrients from the detritus of a plankton bloom that reaches the seafloor is likely to upset the ecology of the communities found there.

While I think that these are all legitimate concerns, it is important to note that, to my knowledge, none of these effects have been observed in iron fertilisation experiments. Oxygen depletion is a known and well documented effect of phytoplankton blooms. But, iron fertlisation on the scale of Russ George's venture may not be large enough or persist for long enough to have this effect. And natural phytoplankton blooms on the scale of the one observed in the area that George dumped his iron are not unknown.

In fact, some researchers are claiming that the observed phytoplankton bloom was already underway before George released the iron sulfate. Many reports I have read say that that the iron fertilisation occurred in July at the time the plankton bloom was getting started. But, it seems the ship which released the iron sulfate didn't leave port until the 8th of August and probably couldn't have started fertilising until a week later. Natural blooms are known to occur regularly in the area, particularly during summer when offshore currents carry iron-rich water hundreds of kilometers out to sea. Unfortunately, the design of the experiment is so poor that it's hard to tell whether the iron sparked the bloom or how much it contributed to it.

.

Rare whale washes up in New Zealand

Ed Yong is a great science writer with a blog on Discover Magazine's website. He has an interesting post on a whale so rare that has never been seen alive. In 2010 two individuals washed up on a beach in the north of New Zealand. They were misidentified as the related Gray's beaked whale, Mesoplodon grayi, until genetic analysis of samples taken from the dead whales showed they were in fact the elusive spade-toothed whale, M. traversii. The subject of Ed's post is a recently published paper the reports on the genetic analysis and provides the first morphological description of a complete animal.

Update
The Science Now site has a story on these whales too. It makes the claim that the beached whales were found alive. I don't know which version is correct. 

Polar sea ice sets two records

On August 26th this year, Arctic sea ice extent fell to its lowest ever since records began in 1979. Sea ice continued to melt into September reaching a minimum of 3.41 million square kilometers on the 16th of September. Which is 790 thousand square kilometers less than the previous record minimum (2007) and roughly half the average minimum from 1979 to 2000 (7.04 million square kilometers).

At the other end of the planet Antarctic sea ice was setting a new winter maximum of 19.44 million square kilometers on the 26th of September. Which is 740 thousand square kilometers more than the 1979 to 2000 average maximum (18.7 million square kilometers). So the gain in the south is far lower than the loss in the north. And the gain in the Antarctic is no cause for celebration.

Antarctic sea ice extent on the 26th of September when the record maximum was set (image NSIDC)

The gain in sea ice in the Antarctic is likely to be due to two effects. The hole in the ozone layer has a cooling effect on the continent because ozone is a greenhouse gas. Warming in the Southern Ocean, which is well documented, has also lead to an increase in the strength of westerly winds. This has pushed more sea ice away from shore expanding its extent in most places except the Antarctic peninsula where it has decreased.

Playing Russian Roulette with Gaia

The addition of iron to the oceans has been suggested as a mechanism to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. In several parts of the ocean, plankton abundance in much lower than expected given the availability of nutrients and sunlight. But, these areas are also low in iron, leading many people to suggest that it's the availability of iron that limits plankton numbers. A while ago I wrote about an experiment in the Southern Ocean that investigated this hypothesis. 

Permission to conduct these experiments was hard to get because the UN has agreed to a moratorium on iron fertilisation until more is known about the effects on other marine life. But, in contravention of the moratorium a rogue businessman has conducted an iron fertilisation 'experiment' in the northeastern Pacific, off the coast of Canada. Russ George has been trying to sell his iron fertilisation scheme to the world as part of the lucrative market for carbon credits.

He convinced the Haida Nation to provide one million dollars funding, apparently by telling them that the dumping of iron would increase salmon numbers in the area. With that money he dumped 100 tons of iron sulfate into the ocean 200 nautical miles west of the islands of Haida Gwaii in July this year. The plankton bloom this created reached 10,000 square kilometers in size. In comparison, the experiment in the Southern Ocean dumped just seven tons of iron sulfate and the bloom peaked at 800 square kilometers.

In conducting this 'experiment' Russ George may have broken international and Canadian laws. It violates the UN moratorium on iron fertilisation and he may have committed fraud in obtaining the funds from the Haida Nation. In any case, there is no evidence that plankton blooms will improve salmon number and only limited evidence that iron fertilisation is an effective mechanism for reducing carbon dioxide. And we know next to nothing about the potential negative impacts of such large blooms.

For more information, including Russ George's history in trying to sell iron fertilisation as a carbon credit scheme, try The Guardian and Deepsea News.

It's Yoda, but not as you know him

A new species of acorn worm has been named after Jedi Master Yoda, the best character in the Star Wars trilogy*. Acorn worms are not true worms. They are more closely related to echinoderms (starfish, sea urchins, sea cucumbers, etc.) than they are to worms. They were once placed as a subphylum of the chordata (i.e. our own phylum), but are now placed within their own phylum, the hemichordata.

Yoda purpurata, the newly described species of acorn worm

The paper described three new species of deep-sea acorn worms in the family Torquaratoridae. Two of which, Allapasus isidis and Tergivelum cinnabarinum, were from previously known genera. But, Yoda purpurata is a new genus and species. It's named after Yoda because the appendages at the head end of the animal are reminiscent of Yoda's ears. All three species were found at about 2.5 kilometers deep on the mid-Atlantic ridge.

*To count as a true Star Wars film, it can't just carry the name. You also have to be able to sit through it without wanting to punch George Lucas. This caveat leaves just three films that can be considered part of the Star Wars canon. And these three films are the originals, not the remakes. 

Priede, I G, Osborn, K J, Gebruk, A V, Jones, D, Shale, D, Rogacheva, A, & Holland, N D (2012). Observations on torquaratorid acorn worms (Hemichordata, Enteropneusta) from the North Atlantic with descriptions of a new genus and three new species Invertebrate Biology, 131 (3), 244-257 DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-7410.2012.00266.x