http://palaverjournal.com/wp-content/Spring%202014/Spring%202014_Final/Spring%202014_Final.swf
Today, climate change is a subject of intense and heated
debate. It’s an issue that has several
dimensions, each with serious implications for the entirety of life on
Earth. There is evidence beyond doubt that
the global climate has changed drastically throughout the course of Earth’s
history for several reasons, including the movement of tectonic plates, natural
disasters, shifting ocean currents, and both the Earth’s eccentricity and its Milankovitch
cycles around the sun. The theory that
is currently contested, however, is that humans are responsible for a recent increase in the planet’s temperature due to the industrial and agricultural emission of CO2 and other greenhouse gases. Climatologists almost unanimously agree that
these emissions can and will have a significant effect on the global climate; however,
some groups, most notably the American media, still convey doubt. It is often difficult to make complex
theories, with several variables, palpable enough so that we can understand them;
climate change is not an exact science, after all.
One of the ideas
that has been used to dispute the theory of anthropogenic climate change takes
a somewhat humble view of the human race: how could humans, who are just one of
millions of species, have enough impact to change something as enormous as the
climate of an entire planet? It does
seem unlikely when viewed in this context.
But one group of organisms having an undue influence on the temperature
of our planet is not without precedent; there is evidence to suggest that it’s
happened before, about 50 million years ago to be precise1.
The discovery was
made back in 2006 by a team of scientists working for the International Ocean
Discovery Program (IODP), an organization that regularly sends out ships to
collect data from beneath the ocean floor.
While drilling in the Arctic Ocean, they were able to retrieve sediment
cores, parts of which were up to 80 million years old (back when the dinosaurs
were still around). But they found
something unexpected in the sediment; at about the 50 million year mark, there
was a very dark layer of what was later identified as mostly the preserved
cells and spores of a fern. As if that
wasn’t strange enough, the spores belonged to a fern that grows only in
freshwater, such as in ponds and streams.
So what was this fern doing at the bottom of the Arctic Ocean?
Well, it turns out
that the climate on Earth about 50 million years ago was very different from
the one we have today. During this time
(Eocene Epoch), temperatures skyrocketed well beyond their usual norm. Deciduous forests were flourishing in
Antarctica, and amphibians and reptiles, such as alligators and turtles,
inhabited the Canadian Arctic. Tropical
plants, such as palm trees, could be found as far north as Wisconsin and even
Alaska2! The Rocky Mountains
were also beginning to form and were dotted with active volcanoes, and several
new species of mammals began to evolve and assert their dominance on the
landscape3. Life was
literally rampant!
The Arctic Ocean also looked a lot different; for one
thing, it wasn’t covered in ice, but it was also much more landlocked than it
is today. If you look at a map of the
Arctic, you can see that the Eurasian and North American continents enclose an
area that is mostly isolated from everything but a broad stretch of the
Atlantic Ocean. During the Eocene,
however, this enclosure was much more pronounced, and the Arctic Ocean had only
two very small connections with other
bodies of water.
Several rivers also
flowed from Asia and North America into the Arctic, and since the Arctic was
buffeted by continents, this freshwater had nowhere to go; it therefore
accumulated on the surface of the ocean (freshwater is less dense than
saltwater). This brings us back to our
mystery, for which we can now reasonably connect the dots. The high temperature of the Eocene, along
with the layer of freshwater that covered the Arctic Ocean, made it possible
for aquatic plants to colonize it.
(Barke et al. 2012) |
Enter the genus Azolla,
an aquatic fern that has a wide distribution throughout the world. Not only is Azolla ‘just’ a fern, but it’s a tiny one at that, with the leaves
of some species measuring less than an inch in length4. Today, Azolla
is considered something of a super plant.
It’s used extensively in the production of rice, since it harbors
bacteria in its leaves that can fix atmospheric nitrogen (an important
ingredient in fertilizers). It also
grows extremely fast; in just 3-5 days, it can completely double in size5. Finally, in addition to its other amazing
qualities, this fern can act as a highly effective carbon sink. Plants get most of their carbon from
atmospheric CO2, but Azolla
is exceptionally good at doing this because of its high growth rate. Now, from the spores found at the bottom of
the Arctic, we know that Azolla
colonized parts of the Arctic Ocean, as well as surrounding rivers and
waterways. As the old fern growth died,
it would have sunk to the bottom of the ocean.
Normally, in fresh- and saltwater systems, there are sufficient
quantities of bacteria at the bottom to degrade all of the dead organisms that
ultimately find their way there, which releases any carbon stored by that
organism back into the surrounding environment.
But the enclosure of the Arctic meant that there was very little mixing
of water on the seabed, creating an anoxic (oxygen depleted) environment in
which very few bacteria could grow6.
This is why we’re able to find such thick layers of Azolla in the sediment cores – there was nothing there to degrade
it!
So, the theory is that Azolla was able to store so much carbon in the ocean floor that it
had quite a large effect on the Earth’s climate. Scientists analyzing the amount of fern
biomass in the sediment cores estimate that it was able to draw down as much as
188 parts per million (ppm) of CO2 from the atmosphere over the course
of about 1 million years7. To
put that into perspective, since 1960, humans have put a total of about 400 ppm
of CO2 into our atmosphere8!
So what does this mean in regard to the climate? Around the time Azolla was flourishing in the Arctic, global temperatures began to
plummet; to explain why, scientists point to a decreasing level of atmospheric CO2. This seems to suggest that Azolla did, in fact, have an inordinate
influence on global climate. There were
certainly other factors that contributed to this decline, especially since the
Earth continued to cool long after the blooms of Azolla had died off. There
is evidence, for example, that indicates the weathering of the newly formed
Himalayan Mountains may have locked away a significant amount of carbon2. Once CO2 began to decline,
however, it would have triggered a chain reaction that caused other greenhouse
gases to become scarce as well, further accelerating planetary cooling.
It’s important to note the disparity in time between
past changes in climate and those occurring today. Earth’s climate has certainly changed several
times, often drastically, in the past; however, these changes took place over
millions of years, which allowed most organisms the time needed to adapt and
evolve to the changing conditions. In
contrast, anthropogenic climate change could take place in the space of
hundreds of years, and it is mostly unknown how this will affect plants and
animals. What we do know doesn’t look too
good. It’s certainly not unreasonable to
conclude that if something as small as a fern could have an influence on the
climate, then one of the most aggressively dominant species on the planet (you
and me) could do it too.
Citations
1Gradstein
FM, Luterbacher HP, Ali JR, Brinkhuis H, Gradstein FM, Hooker JJ, Monechi S,
Ogg JG, Powell J, Röhl U, Sanfilippo A, Schmitz B. (2004) The paleogene
period. In: A Geologic Time
Scale (eds Gradstein FM, Ogg
JG, Smith AG). pp. 396. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Barke, J., Burgh, J., Cittert, J., Collinson, M., Pearce, M., Bujak, J., Clausen, C. Speelman, E., Kempen, M., Reichart, G., Lotter, A. & Brinkhuis, H. (2012) Coeval Eocene blooms of the freshwater fern Azolla in and around Arctic and Nordic seas. Palaeogeography, palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 337, 108-119.
2Beerling, D. (2007). The emerald planet. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3Department
of Paleobiology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian
Institution. (n.d.). The
Eocene. Retrieved from
http://paleobiology.si.edu/geotime/main/htmlversion/eocene1.html
4Smith, A.
R., Pryer, K. M., Schuettpelz, E., Korall, P., Schneider, H., & Wolf, P. G.
(2008). Fern classification. In T. A. Ranker & C. H. Haufler (Eds.), Biology and evolution of ferns and
lycophytes (pp. 417-467).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5Wagner GM
(1997) Azolla: a review of its biology and utilization. The Botanical Review 63, 1–26.
6Speelman,
E., Damste, J. S., Marz, C., Brumsack, H., & Reichart, G. J. (2010). Arctic
ocean circulation during the anoxic eocene azolla event. Geophysical Research Abstracts, 12.
7Speelman,
E. N., Van Kempen, M. M. L., Barke, J., Brinkhuis, H., Reichart, G. J.,
Smolders, A. J. P., Roelofs, G. M., & Sangiorgi, F., De Leeuw, J. W.,
Lotter, A. F., Sinninghe Damste, J. S. (2009).
The eocene arctic azolla bloom: environmental conditions, productivity and
carbon drawdown. Geobiology, 7, 155-170. doi:
10.1111/j.1472-4669.2009.00195.x
8Dr.
Pieter Tans, NOAA/ESRL (www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/) and Dr. Ralph
Keeling,
Scripps Institution of Oceanography (scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/).
No comments:
Post a Comment