Ocean Acidification and Mollusks

[jshepherd]

This is an interesting article about ocean acidification and mollusks.

http://www.nationofchange.org/ocean-acidification-leaves-mollusks-naked-and-confused-1349273370

 

[Cyril Roger Brossard]

Thank you for the link. Although a bit incomplete it shows that acidification may induce psychosomatic syndrome.
If I may, acidification doesn't has much affect the calcification but in fact increase the dissolution (as shown on Nucella lamellosa BMSC 2009). It means that the animal can still produce calcium carbonate, but that due to higher level of CO2 the dissolution is even faster. Kind of like a leaking pool...
The probable incidence on Nacre producing mollusk is quite interesting. Will the reserves be used to coat and protect the outside or the inside? Both being equal.

 

[GemGeek]

It's depressing.

 

[Cyril Roger Brossard]

It's depressing.

Yes indeed.


Not being my intent to add anything disheartening nor to post anything unless verified, I may add that the post of Mr.Jeremy Shepherd is (or should be) attention-grabbing, but as with anything touching the environment is tainted with a huge question mark (not him, the article that is) and the impact becomes ipso facto limited.
Environment is a political platform used for decades prior to election (regardless of your nationality, ethnic group and political orientation).
Farmers (agriculture sector) are always listened to and reassured... eventually few is done, or whenever something is done it is done at such a pace that the effects are drown into the maelstrom caused by the negative effects. I would tend to think of it as a snowball, and an endless slope...

Yes it is depressing but it goes beyond pearls, I indeed suggested one plausible scenario "Will the reserves be used to coat and protect the outside or the inside?" but you see it goes beyond jewelry... It concerns us.
Temperature increase and subsequent acidification (several post of this subject in other threads) will eventually have global impact on the oceans and marine ecosystem.
A study has shown that the temperature acts on the distribution, the phenology and the productivity of marine life. That is where they are found, what is their life cycle, and if they are found in sufficient quantity.
The increase of temperature induces a decrease of the size of marine life; a study estimated that it would reach a 24% decrease in body mass in the next 35 years. (Cheung, Sarmiento ,2012).
What does it mean?
Well fishes and mollusks (primary source of protein for many coastal countries (30% of the global protein production as per WHO)) will decrease in size, (and/or) will migrate to cooler waters, and will keep their reserves to survive.

Any shortfall in fish supplies is likely to affect developing nations more than developed nations. As demand and fish prices rise, exports of fish products from developing nations will tend to rise as well, leaving fewer fish for local consumption and putting fish protein increasingly out of reach for low-income families

by Meryl Williams 1996.

We should then expect smaller marine life in the tropics, the fishes capable of migrating will move toward the poles, those unable to do so will adapt.
We should expect an increase in the demand (consumption has been growing at a rate of 3.6% per year since 1961) but a decrease in the offer.

 

[CortezPearls]

Disturbing & Depressing...yet our little blue Planet has seen it all before and it did experience ages with higher athmospheric CO2 & O2 content. During a part of the Mesozoic period we did have high CO2 levels (more info in Wikipedia):

"The climate of the Cretaceous is less certain and more widely disputed. Higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are thought to have caused the world temperature gradient from north to south to become almost flat: temperatures were about the same across the planet. Average temperatures were also higher than today by about 10?C. In fact, by the middle Cretaceous, equatorial ocean waters (perhaps as warm as 20?C in the deep ocean) may have been too warm for sea life, and land areas near the equator may have been deserts despite their proximity to water. The circulation of oxygen to the deep ocean may also have been disrupted."

Yet Life flourished and continued to exist...yes, different but Life nonetheless, because Life constantly ADAPTS. During the great Permian-Triassic Extinction event (it had a MASSIVE effect on Aquatic organisms) I can again quote Wikipedia: "The extinction primarily affected organisms with calcium carbonate skeletons, especially those reliant on ambient CO2 levels to produce their skeletons" and "The observed pattern of marine extinctions is also consistent with hypercapnia (excessive levels of carbon dioxide). Carbon dioxide (CO2) is actively toxic at above-normal concentrations, as it reduces the ability of respiratory pigments to oxygenate tissues, and makes body fluids more acidic, thereby hampering the production of carbonate hard parts like shells. At high concentrations, carbon dioxide causes narcosis (intoxication)"

The "disorientation" experienced by predators & prey in the article shared by Jeremy can be explained by narcosis.

What will happen in the future? Only God knows...but I'm guessing that pearls will become more valuable since we may not be able to continue producing them once our oyster/mussel stocks collapse or their ability to produce nacre is diminished.

 

[Cyril Roger Brossard]

hehehe and I thought I was posting depressing news...
Hopefully we will not (nor the future generations) experience such cataclysmic event (One may hope). This said, yes, life may thrive and it may be different, but I am hoping that adaptation will occur and that the level of CO2 will eventually stabilize.

Thanks for the info, that sentence "equatorial ocean waters (perhaps as warm as 20?C in the deep ocean) may have been too warm for sea life, and land areas near the equator may have been deserts despite their proximity to water" is scary though.