4.7 Article

Ocean acidification challenges copepod phenotypic plasticity

Journal

BIOGEOSCIENCES
Volume 13, Issue 22, Pages 6171-6182

Publisher

COPERNICUS GESELLSCHAFT MBH
DOI: 10.5194/bg-13-6171-2016

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. BMBF [FKZ 03F06550, FKZ 03F0611, 228224]
  2. Cluster of Excellence The Future Ocean [CP1141]
  3. Academy of Finland [276947]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ocean acidification is challenging phenotypic plasticity of individuals and populations. Calanoid copepods (zooplankton) are shown to be fairly plastic against altered pH conditions, and laboratory studies indicate that transgenerational effects are one mechanism behind this plasticity. We studied phenotypic plasticity of the copepod Acartia sp. in the course of a pelagic, large-volume mesocosm study that was conducted to investigate ecosystem and biogeochemical responses to ocean acidification. We measured copepod egg production rate, egg-hatching success, adult female size and adult female antioxidant capacity (ORAC) as a function of acidification (fCO(2) similar to 365-1231 mu atm) and as a function of quantity and quality of their diet. We used an egg transplant experiment to reveal whether transgenerational effects can alleviate the possible negative effects of ocean acidification on offspring development. We found significant negative effects of ocean acidification on adult female size. In addition, we found signs of a possible threshold at high fCO(2), above which adaptive maternal effects cannot alleviate the negative effects of acidification on egg-hatching and nauplii development. We did not find support for the hypothesis that insufficient food quantity (total particulate carbon <55 mu m) or quality (C : N) weakens the transgenerational effects. However, females with high-ORAC-produced eggs with high hatching success. Overall, these results indicate that Acartia sp. could be affected by projected near-future CO2 levels.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available