4.6 Article

Can coral skeletal-bound nitrogen isotopes be used as a proxy for past bleaching?

Journal

BIOGEOCHEMISTRY
Volume 151, Issue 1, Pages 31-41

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10533-020-00706-2

Keywords

Historical coral bleaching; Nitrogen isotope; Skeletal density; Great Barrier Reef

Funding

  1. AusAID fellowship
  2. Australian Pacific Science Foundation [APSF14_5]
  3. ARC [DP170100734]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There is currently no reliable geochemical proxy of historical coral bleaching. Here we test the hypothesis that increases in the nitrogen isotopic signature of coral tissue, which is recorded in skeletal-bound organic material (CS-delta N-15), can be used to detect coral bleaching events in the past. We measured CS-delta N-15 in coral colonies that showed high density thermal stress bands associated with the 1998 and 2002 mass bleaching events on the central Great Barrier Reef. Analysis of coral cores from 2 inshore and 1 mid-shelf reef found that increases in CS-delta N-15 occurred either side of the thermal stress events and were therefore unlikely to be a physiological response to bleaching. We then assessed whether CS-delta N-15 could be used to detect shelf-wide upwelling, which has been previously shown to coincide with mass bleaching events. For the inshore sites the response of CS-delta N-15 to upwelling was not uniform between reefs or between colonies from the same reef. However, on the mid-shelf reef, increased CS-delta N-15 during the known upwelling of 1998 was more consistent between cores. Analysis of a 23-year old coral core from the mid-shelf reef showed increased CS-delta N-15 between 1983-1985 and 1997-2000, periods where strong El Nino events were proceeded by intense wind-driven upwelling. We conclude that coral CS-delta N-15 is not a direct proxy for coral bleaching but can be used to detect prolonged and pervasive upwelling that coincides with mass bleaching events. Further validation with longer core records is required.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available