4.6 Article

Effects of ocean acidification on microbial community composition of, and oxygen fluxes through, biofilms from the Great Barrier Reef

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 13, Issue 11, Pages 2976-2989

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2011.02571.x

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. German Research Foundation (DFG) [Wi 2677/2-1]
  2. Global Environment Facility (GEF)
  3. Marine and Tropical Sciences Research Facility (MTSRF)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Rising anthropogenic CO2 emissions acidify the oceans, and cause changes to seawater carbon chemistry. Bacterial biofilm communities reflect environmental disturbances and may rapidly respond to ocean acidification. This study investigates community composition and activity responses to experimental ocean acidification in biofilms from the Australian Great Barrier Reef. Natural biofilms grown on glass slides were exposed for 11 d to four controlled pCO2 concentrations representing the following scenarios: A) pre-industrial (similar to 300 ppm), B) present-day (similar to 400 ppm), C) mid century (similar to 560 ppm) and D) late century (similar to 1140 ppm). Terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism and clone library analyses of 16S rRNA genes revealed CO2-correlated bacterial community shifts between treatments A, B and D. Observed bacterial community shifts were driven by decreases in the relative abundance of Alphaproteobacteria and increases of Flavobacteriales (Bacteroidetes) at increased CO2 concentrations, indicating pH sensitivity of specific bacterial groups. Elevated pCO2 (C + D) shifted biofilm algal communities and significantly increased C and N contents, yet O2 fluxes, measured using in light and dark incubations, remained unchanged. Our findings suggest that bacterial biofilm communities rapidly adapt and reorganize in response to high pCO2 to maintain activity such as oxygen production.

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