Realistic Alternatives to Dust: What Else Could Feed a Plankton Bloom? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InWhat efficiencies make a realistic food chain?Could life survive on a diet of dust?Could hydroponic farms reasonably feed 100 billion people?How realistic could creating fake bruises be?What alternatives for fire can an aquatic sentient species use?What evolved weapons could be used against graphene skin?What animal could be used to make imitation human meat?What could possibly replace beer?In a single-continent world, what could cause hydrothermal vents?What Else Could Create Jeffrey Linn's Coastlines BESIDES The Influence of Ice?
Deadlock Graph and Interpretation, solution to avoid
Output the Arecibo Message
Why is the maximum length of OpenWrt’s root password 8 characters?
What could be the right powersource for 15 seconds lifespan disposable giant chainsaw?
Is domain driven design an anti-SQL pattern?
Is three citations per paragraph excessive for undergraduate research paper?
Should I use my personal or workplace e-mail when registering to external websites for work purpose?
Landlord wants to switch my lease to a "Land contract" to "get back at the city"
If the Wish spell is used to duplicate the effect of Simulacrum, are existing duplicates destroyed?
It's possible to achieve negative score?
Protecting Dualbooting Windows from dangerous code (like rm -rf)
Geography at the pixel level
Spanish for "widget"
How to make payment on the internet without leaving a money trail?
What does "sndry explns" mean in one of the Hitchhiker's guide books?
Understanding the implication of what "well-defined" means for the operation in quotient group
How can I fix this gap between bookcases I made?
Time travel alters history but people keep saying nothing's changed
What is the motivation for a law requiring 2 parties to consent for recording a conversation
Where to refill my bottle in India?
Inversion Puzzle
What does Linus Torvalds mean when he says that Git "never ever" tracks a file?
The difference between dialogue marks
Why do I get badly formatted numerical results when I use StringForm?
Realistic Alternatives to Dust: What Else Could Feed a Plankton Bloom?
The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InWhat efficiencies make a realistic food chain?Could life survive on a diet of dust?Could hydroponic farms reasonably feed 100 billion people?How realistic could creating fake bruises be?What alternatives for fire can an aquatic sentient species use?What evolved weapons could be used against graphene skin?What animal could be used to make imitation human meat?What could possibly replace beer?In a single-continent world, what could cause hydrothermal vents?What Else Could Create Jeffrey Linn's Coastlines BESIDES The Influence of Ice?
$begingroup$
Phytoplankton are not to be taken for granted. Not only do they form the core of marine food webs around the world, they also release half of the world's oxygen. But phytoplankton, being plant-like organisms, need nutrients for their blooms to survive and thrive into populations large enough to be visible from space. For many, the origins of those nutrients come from one of the least likely sources: desert dust storms swept up from far away by deserts. As the dust settles down to the oceans, they drop down enough nutrients to create these vast blooms on an annual basis.
But what else could feed a plankton bloom on a global scale and an annual basis?
You could say that volcanic ash could be the answer, but there's a problem--unlike dust storms, volcanoes don't erupt at once or regularly. Two eruptions from one same volcano could be years or even decades apart, and that sort of duration gap won't do for plankton blooms. So what else could feed a plankton bloom on a global scale and an annual basis?
EDIT--NO manmade processes! Everyting MUST be natural!
reality-check food ocean ecology
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Phytoplankton are not to be taken for granted. Not only do they form the core of marine food webs around the world, they also release half of the world's oxygen. But phytoplankton, being plant-like organisms, need nutrients for their blooms to survive and thrive into populations large enough to be visible from space. For many, the origins of those nutrients come from one of the least likely sources: desert dust storms swept up from far away by deserts. As the dust settles down to the oceans, they drop down enough nutrients to create these vast blooms on an annual basis.
But what else could feed a plankton bloom on a global scale and an annual basis?
You could say that volcanic ash could be the answer, but there's a problem--unlike dust storms, volcanoes don't erupt at once or regularly. Two eruptions from one same volcano could be years or even decades apart, and that sort of duration gap won't do for plankton blooms. So what else could feed a plankton bloom on a global scale and an annual basis?
EDIT--NO manmade processes! Everyting MUST be natural!
reality-check food ocean ecology
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Pollen would probably work.
$endgroup$
– RBarryYoung
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Phytoplankton are not to be taken for granted. Not only do they form the core of marine food webs around the world, they also release half of the world's oxygen. But phytoplankton, being plant-like organisms, need nutrients for their blooms to survive and thrive into populations large enough to be visible from space. For many, the origins of those nutrients come from one of the least likely sources: desert dust storms swept up from far away by deserts. As the dust settles down to the oceans, they drop down enough nutrients to create these vast blooms on an annual basis.
But what else could feed a plankton bloom on a global scale and an annual basis?
You could say that volcanic ash could be the answer, but there's a problem--unlike dust storms, volcanoes don't erupt at once or regularly. Two eruptions from one same volcano could be years or even decades apart, and that sort of duration gap won't do for plankton blooms. So what else could feed a plankton bloom on a global scale and an annual basis?
EDIT--NO manmade processes! Everyting MUST be natural!
reality-check food ocean ecology
$endgroup$
Phytoplankton are not to be taken for granted. Not only do they form the core of marine food webs around the world, they also release half of the world's oxygen. But phytoplankton, being plant-like organisms, need nutrients for their blooms to survive and thrive into populations large enough to be visible from space. For many, the origins of those nutrients come from one of the least likely sources: desert dust storms swept up from far away by deserts. As the dust settles down to the oceans, they drop down enough nutrients to create these vast blooms on an annual basis.
But what else could feed a plankton bloom on a global scale and an annual basis?
You could say that volcanic ash could be the answer, but there's a problem--unlike dust storms, volcanoes don't erupt at once or regularly. Two eruptions from one same volcano could be years or even decades apart, and that sort of duration gap won't do for plankton blooms. So what else could feed a plankton bloom on a global scale and an annual basis?
EDIT--NO manmade processes! Everyting MUST be natural!
reality-check food ocean ecology
reality-check food ocean ecology
edited 6 hours ago
JohnWDailey
asked 9 hours ago
JohnWDaileyJohnWDailey
2,7642785
2,7642785
$begingroup$
Pollen would probably work.
$endgroup$
– RBarryYoung
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Pollen would probably work.
$endgroup$
– RBarryYoung
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Pollen would probably work.
$endgroup$
– RBarryYoung
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Pollen would probably work.
$endgroup$
– RBarryYoung
2 hours ago
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Rivers.
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/1257/mississippi-river-sediment-plume
Depicted: the Mississippi dumping its load of sediment into the Gulf of Mexico. River flow is cyclical in most places, with high flow during rainy season or spring melt and low flow during dry season / winter or summer. During high flow, nutrients move from the land to the river and on to the sea. With the advent of synthetic fertilizer this can be too much of a good thing - so much nitrogen and phosphorus that they produce massive blooms, that then die.
Icebergs.
Icebergs generation is periodic, both intrayear and over longer periods.
https://www.nationalgeographic.org/media/iceberg-frequency/
Icebergs that have scraped along the land can ferry nutrients out to sea, releasing them slowly as the ice melts.
https://phys.org/news/2019-03-mystery-green-icebergs.html
The green icebergs have been a curiosity to scientists for decades,
but now glaciologists report in a new study that they suspect iron
oxides in rock dust from Antarctica's mainland are turning some
icebergs green... Iron is a key nutrient for phytoplankton,
microscopic plants that form the base of the marine food web. But iron
is scarce in many areas of the ocean.
If experiments prove the new theory right, it would mean green
icebergs are ferrying precious iron from Antarctica's mainland to the
open sea when they break off, providing this key nutrient to the
organisms that support nearly all marine life.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
So in an alternate Earth where many of our major rivers are crammed with reefs of clams, mussels and oysters, would the rivers still be dirty enough to dump nutrients into the sea?
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
An interesting question. Clam infested waters might have more nutrients. In the US, invasive bivalves make the water clearer but also are associated with more algal blooms - possibly suggesting that with a large percentage of the primary producers at the bottom of the food chain filtered out by the bivalves more nutrients remain in the water, unused.
$endgroup$
– Willk
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Eventually, phytoplankton don't really feed on dust, but on nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), iron(Fe), and the various other nutrients plants need, that may compose it. But if a desert hold such nutrients, it will not stay a desert for long.
An example of a yearly massive bloom could be a mass migration of ground animal, on shore, for reproductive purpose (a bit like toad, that need water even if they are most the time ground animal). They will stay on the shore for some weeks, defecating and urinating, and releasing a massive dose of nitrates, phosphate and so on...
Not accepted as an answer since last edit :
Second example, industrial activity, mainly agriculture, may lead to algae bloom (like in Brittany, France, with the famous green and smelly algae). And since plants grow on yearly cycle, fertilizer are used on a yearly basis
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Just made an edit to clarify that I don't want manmade processes.
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Up-welling. Nutrients tend to sink to the bottom, or to deep water where not enough light reaches to keep photosynthetic life forms thriving. If there is some mechanism to vigorously return deep water to the surface then it can bring the nutrients with it.
Up-welling might well be a seasonal thing. For example, currents could flow in one direction half the year when the snow melts in this hemisphere and builds up in the other. Then in the other direction for the other half of the year. This could produce a seasonal stirring of the deeper ocean layers.
Up-welling could be driven by temperature differences produced by geological heating that does not rise to the level of volcanoes. Water is at its highest density at close to 1.5°C. So if you have something that warms the depths it will bring the deep water back to the surface. This probably isn't seasonal.
In exotic places with exotic tides, that might do it. If a large moon had an exceedingly eccentric orbit, you could have extreme tides for the portion of the moon's orbit when it was closest, then far weaker tides the rest of the time.
New contributor
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Yes, but WHAT will be welled up?
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Nothin but dust, baby.
Phytoplankton blooms are complex beasts. We've got a general idea of what causes them, and a general idea of what collapses them, but the intricacies are hard to capture. This is going to be a frame-challenge type answer; if you're not excited about those, you've been warned. If you're excited about the little green things, read on.
Dust storms aren't regular, annual events
The question as asked conflates two phenomena connected to phytoplankton blooms - one, that blooms appear and decay with regularity; and two, that blooms are sometimes caused by dust storms. Both of these are well documented, but they're entirely separate events.
Periodic blooms
Phytoplankton blooms have several regular, periodic cycles that they go through. These are best outlined by the recent review here, but I'll do my best to summarize the process and explain why they've got a seasonal behavior.
These little green things thrive on two things: nutrients and sunlight. In the ocean, sunlight is abundant right near the surface; but nutrients are more easily found at depth.
Side comment: one other answer noted that "nutrients tend to sink", which isn't quite true. It certainly looks that way, if you look at element profiles in the ocean, especially for common nutrients like P, N, or Fe. However, these nutrients are instead found in low concentrations at the surface because they're all tied up in cell structures rather than dissolved in the water column. When dead organisms sink in the water column, those elements are remineralized and returned to their dissolved form.
Phytoplankton deal with this discrepancy by forming something known as the Deep Chlorophyll Maximum (DCM) at a depth deep enough to have nutrients while avoiding missing out on the sunlight from above. When nutrients can be found closer to the surface, the phytoplankton also tend to get shallower.
So, seasonality. The ocean is normally thermally stratified - organized vertically by density - which makes it difficult for deep water (full of nutrients) and shallow water (full of sunlight) to mix. However, this stratification breaks down when the surface water is about the same temperature as the deeper water. This happens in the winter - check out the graphic below, from this excellent website:
Of course, during the winter there's not a whole of sunlight - so when the sun comes back in the spring, we get a phytoplankton bloom that happens over an entire hemisphere! Check out the link here for an excellent animation from the NASA Earth Observatory demonstrating this. That's the main annual cycle.
In lakes, we often get two blooms - one in spring and one in fall. The logic above still applies, but in lakes we get reverse stratification in the winter that means that mixing happens more in spring and fall than in winter. A similar graphic from Nat Geo below explains this better:
This means that lakes often have semiannual blooms, in both spring and fall.
Irregular blooms
The final kind of blooms we get in the ocean aren't regular at all. That's because these blooms aren't triggered by any kind of seasonal or annual cycle (especially if we're not including fertilizer runoff in the growing season), but are instead triggered by random events such as dust storms, volcanoes, or rivers.
Dust storms are especially powerful fertilizers because the ocean as a whole isn't limited by a single nutrient. Some areas desperately need phosphorus and have nitrogen to spare, while other areas are iron-limited but otherwise high-nutrient. The figure below summarizes this for diatoms, a major constituent of phytoplankton (from this paper):
Dust is great because it's full of all these things! Most notably, the iron and phosphate nutrient cycles have no airborne component, meaning that you can't pull those nutrients out of thin air like you can with nitrogen. Dust is generally made of rocks (or, rocks are made of dust?), so this is one way to transport a whole lot of phosphate and iron into the surface ocean. Rather than rising up from the depths, it's being dropped from above. That makes it really hard to mimic, especially on a global scale.
TL;DR:
Dust-triggered blooms are unique events. They're not periodic, but they are special because the transport nutrients that would normally be very hard to find in the middle of the ocean. Given that periodic blooms happen to at most a hemisphere at a time (i.e. not global), and that dust-triggered blooms aren't annual, a frame-challenge answer to this question is necessary.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "579"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f143609%2frealistic-alternatives-to-dust-what-else-could-feed-a-plankton-bloom%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Rivers.
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/1257/mississippi-river-sediment-plume
Depicted: the Mississippi dumping its load of sediment into the Gulf of Mexico. River flow is cyclical in most places, with high flow during rainy season or spring melt and low flow during dry season / winter or summer. During high flow, nutrients move from the land to the river and on to the sea. With the advent of synthetic fertilizer this can be too much of a good thing - so much nitrogen and phosphorus that they produce massive blooms, that then die.
Icebergs.
Icebergs generation is periodic, both intrayear and over longer periods.
https://www.nationalgeographic.org/media/iceberg-frequency/
Icebergs that have scraped along the land can ferry nutrients out to sea, releasing them slowly as the ice melts.
https://phys.org/news/2019-03-mystery-green-icebergs.html
The green icebergs have been a curiosity to scientists for decades,
but now glaciologists report in a new study that they suspect iron
oxides in rock dust from Antarctica's mainland are turning some
icebergs green... Iron is a key nutrient for phytoplankton,
microscopic plants that form the base of the marine food web. But iron
is scarce in many areas of the ocean.
If experiments prove the new theory right, it would mean green
icebergs are ferrying precious iron from Antarctica's mainland to the
open sea when they break off, providing this key nutrient to the
organisms that support nearly all marine life.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
So in an alternate Earth where many of our major rivers are crammed with reefs of clams, mussels and oysters, would the rivers still be dirty enough to dump nutrients into the sea?
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
An interesting question. Clam infested waters might have more nutrients. In the US, invasive bivalves make the water clearer but also are associated with more algal blooms - possibly suggesting that with a large percentage of the primary producers at the bottom of the food chain filtered out by the bivalves more nutrients remain in the water, unused.
$endgroup$
– Willk
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Rivers.
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/1257/mississippi-river-sediment-plume
Depicted: the Mississippi dumping its load of sediment into the Gulf of Mexico. River flow is cyclical in most places, with high flow during rainy season or spring melt and low flow during dry season / winter or summer. During high flow, nutrients move from the land to the river and on to the sea. With the advent of synthetic fertilizer this can be too much of a good thing - so much nitrogen and phosphorus that they produce massive blooms, that then die.
Icebergs.
Icebergs generation is periodic, both intrayear and over longer periods.
https://www.nationalgeographic.org/media/iceberg-frequency/
Icebergs that have scraped along the land can ferry nutrients out to sea, releasing them slowly as the ice melts.
https://phys.org/news/2019-03-mystery-green-icebergs.html
The green icebergs have been a curiosity to scientists for decades,
but now glaciologists report in a new study that they suspect iron
oxides in rock dust from Antarctica's mainland are turning some
icebergs green... Iron is a key nutrient for phytoplankton,
microscopic plants that form the base of the marine food web. But iron
is scarce in many areas of the ocean.
If experiments prove the new theory right, it would mean green
icebergs are ferrying precious iron from Antarctica's mainland to the
open sea when they break off, providing this key nutrient to the
organisms that support nearly all marine life.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
So in an alternate Earth where many of our major rivers are crammed with reefs of clams, mussels and oysters, would the rivers still be dirty enough to dump nutrients into the sea?
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
An interesting question. Clam infested waters might have more nutrients. In the US, invasive bivalves make the water clearer but also are associated with more algal blooms - possibly suggesting that with a large percentage of the primary producers at the bottom of the food chain filtered out by the bivalves more nutrients remain in the water, unused.
$endgroup$
– Willk
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Rivers.
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/1257/mississippi-river-sediment-plume
Depicted: the Mississippi dumping its load of sediment into the Gulf of Mexico. River flow is cyclical in most places, with high flow during rainy season or spring melt and low flow during dry season / winter or summer. During high flow, nutrients move from the land to the river and on to the sea. With the advent of synthetic fertilizer this can be too much of a good thing - so much nitrogen and phosphorus that they produce massive blooms, that then die.
Icebergs.
Icebergs generation is periodic, both intrayear and over longer periods.
https://www.nationalgeographic.org/media/iceberg-frequency/
Icebergs that have scraped along the land can ferry nutrients out to sea, releasing them slowly as the ice melts.
https://phys.org/news/2019-03-mystery-green-icebergs.html
The green icebergs have been a curiosity to scientists for decades,
but now glaciologists report in a new study that they suspect iron
oxides in rock dust from Antarctica's mainland are turning some
icebergs green... Iron is a key nutrient for phytoplankton,
microscopic plants that form the base of the marine food web. But iron
is scarce in many areas of the ocean.
If experiments prove the new theory right, it would mean green
icebergs are ferrying precious iron from Antarctica's mainland to the
open sea when they break off, providing this key nutrient to the
organisms that support nearly all marine life.
$endgroup$
Rivers.
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/1257/mississippi-river-sediment-plume
Depicted: the Mississippi dumping its load of sediment into the Gulf of Mexico. River flow is cyclical in most places, with high flow during rainy season or spring melt and low flow during dry season / winter or summer. During high flow, nutrients move from the land to the river and on to the sea. With the advent of synthetic fertilizer this can be too much of a good thing - so much nitrogen and phosphorus that they produce massive blooms, that then die.
Icebergs.
Icebergs generation is periodic, both intrayear and over longer periods.
https://www.nationalgeographic.org/media/iceberg-frequency/
Icebergs that have scraped along the land can ferry nutrients out to sea, releasing them slowly as the ice melts.
https://phys.org/news/2019-03-mystery-green-icebergs.html
The green icebergs have been a curiosity to scientists for decades,
but now glaciologists report in a new study that they suspect iron
oxides in rock dust from Antarctica's mainland are turning some
icebergs green... Iron is a key nutrient for phytoplankton,
microscopic plants that form the base of the marine food web. But iron
is scarce in many areas of the ocean.
If experiments prove the new theory right, it would mean green
icebergs are ferrying precious iron from Antarctica's mainland to the
open sea when they break off, providing this key nutrient to the
organisms that support nearly all marine life.
edited 8 hours ago
answered 8 hours ago
WillkWillk
116k27220488
116k27220488
$begingroup$
So in an alternate Earth where many of our major rivers are crammed with reefs of clams, mussels and oysters, would the rivers still be dirty enough to dump nutrients into the sea?
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
An interesting question. Clam infested waters might have more nutrients. In the US, invasive bivalves make the water clearer but also are associated with more algal blooms - possibly suggesting that with a large percentage of the primary producers at the bottom of the food chain filtered out by the bivalves more nutrients remain in the water, unused.
$endgroup$
– Willk
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
So in an alternate Earth where many of our major rivers are crammed with reefs of clams, mussels and oysters, would the rivers still be dirty enough to dump nutrients into the sea?
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
An interesting question. Clam infested waters might have more nutrients. In the US, invasive bivalves make the water clearer but also are associated with more algal blooms - possibly suggesting that with a large percentage of the primary producers at the bottom of the food chain filtered out by the bivalves more nutrients remain in the water, unused.
$endgroup$
– Willk
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
So in an alternate Earth where many of our major rivers are crammed with reefs of clams, mussels and oysters, would the rivers still be dirty enough to dump nutrients into the sea?
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
So in an alternate Earth where many of our major rivers are crammed with reefs of clams, mussels and oysters, would the rivers still be dirty enough to dump nutrients into the sea?
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
An interesting question. Clam infested waters might have more nutrients. In the US, invasive bivalves make the water clearer but also are associated with more algal blooms - possibly suggesting that with a large percentage of the primary producers at the bottom of the food chain filtered out by the bivalves more nutrients remain in the water, unused.
$endgroup$
– Willk
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
An interesting question. Clam infested waters might have more nutrients. In the US, invasive bivalves make the water clearer but also are associated with more algal blooms - possibly suggesting that with a large percentage of the primary producers at the bottom of the food chain filtered out by the bivalves more nutrients remain in the water, unused.
$endgroup$
– Willk
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Eventually, phytoplankton don't really feed on dust, but on nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), iron(Fe), and the various other nutrients plants need, that may compose it. But if a desert hold such nutrients, it will not stay a desert for long.
An example of a yearly massive bloom could be a mass migration of ground animal, on shore, for reproductive purpose (a bit like toad, that need water even if they are most the time ground animal). They will stay on the shore for some weeks, defecating and urinating, and releasing a massive dose of nitrates, phosphate and so on...
Not accepted as an answer since last edit :
Second example, industrial activity, mainly agriculture, may lead to algae bloom (like in Brittany, France, with the famous green and smelly algae). And since plants grow on yearly cycle, fertilizer are used on a yearly basis
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Just made an edit to clarify that I don't want manmade processes.
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Eventually, phytoplankton don't really feed on dust, but on nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), iron(Fe), and the various other nutrients plants need, that may compose it. But if a desert hold such nutrients, it will not stay a desert for long.
An example of a yearly massive bloom could be a mass migration of ground animal, on shore, for reproductive purpose (a bit like toad, that need water even if they are most the time ground animal). They will stay on the shore for some weeks, defecating and urinating, and releasing a massive dose of nitrates, phosphate and so on...
Not accepted as an answer since last edit :
Second example, industrial activity, mainly agriculture, may lead to algae bloom (like in Brittany, France, with the famous green and smelly algae). And since plants grow on yearly cycle, fertilizer are used on a yearly basis
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Just made an edit to clarify that I don't want manmade processes.
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Eventually, phytoplankton don't really feed on dust, but on nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), iron(Fe), and the various other nutrients plants need, that may compose it. But if a desert hold such nutrients, it will not stay a desert for long.
An example of a yearly massive bloom could be a mass migration of ground animal, on shore, for reproductive purpose (a bit like toad, that need water even if they are most the time ground animal). They will stay on the shore for some weeks, defecating and urinating, and releasing a massive dose of nitrates, phosphate and so on...
Not accepted as an answer since last edit :
Second example, industrial activity, mainly agriculture, may lead to algae bloom (like in Brittany, France, with the famous green and smelly algae). And since plants grow on yearly cycle, fertilizer are used on a yearly basis
$endgroup$
Eventually, phytoplankton don't really feed on dust, but on nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), iron(Fe), and the various other nutrients plants need, that may compose it. But if a desert hold such nutrients, it will not stay a desert for long.
An example of a yearly massive bloom could be a mass migration of ground animal, on shore, for reproductive purpose (a bit like toad, that need water even if they are most the time ground animal). They will stay on the shore for some weeks, defecating and urinating, and releasing a massive dose of nitrates, phosphate and so on...
Not accepted as an answer since last edit :
Second example, industrial activity, mainly agriculture, may lead to algae bloom (like in Brittany, France, with the famous green and smelly algae). And since plants grow on yearly cycle, fertilizer are used on a yearly basis
edited 1 hour ago
answered 8 hours ago
CailloumaxCailloumax
39118
39118
$begingroup$
Just made an edit to clarify that I don't want manmade processes.
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Just made an edit to clarify that I don't want manmade processes.
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Just made an edit to clarify that I don't want manmade processes.
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Just made an edit to clarify that I don't want manmade processes.
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Up-welling. Nutrients tend to sink to the bottom, or to deep water where not enough light reaches to keep photosynthetic life forms thriving. If there is some mechanism to vigorously return deep water to the surface then it can bring the nutrients with it.
Up-welling might well be a seasonal thing. For example, currents could flow in one direction half the year when the snow melts in this hemisphere and builds up in the other. Then in the other direction for the other half of the year. This could produce a seasonal stirring of the deeper ocean layers.
Up-welling could be driven by temperature differences produced by geological heating that does not rise to the level of volcanoes. Water is at its highest density at close to 1.5°C. So if you have something that warms the depths it will bring the deep water back to the surface. This probably isn't seasonal.
In exotic places with exotic tides, that might do it. If a large moon had an exceedingly eccentric orbit, you could have extreme tides for the portion of the moon's orbit when it was closest, then far weaker tides the rest of the time.
New contributor
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Yes, but WHAT will be welled up?
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Up-welling. Nutrients tend to sink to the bottom, or to deep water where not enough light reaches to keep photosynthetic life forms thriving. If there is some mechanism to vigorously return deep water to the surface then it can bring the nutrients with it.
Up-welling might well be a seasonal thing. For example, currents could flow in one direction half the year when the snow melts in this hemisphere and builds up in the other. Then in the other direction for the other half of the year. This could produce a seasonal stirring of the deeper ocean layers.
Up-welling could be driven by temperature differences produced by geological heating that does not rise to the level of volcanoes. Water is at its highest density at close to 1.5°C. So if you have something that warms the depths it will bring the deep water back to the surface. This probably isn't seasonal.
In exotic places with exotic tides, that might do it. If a large moon had an exceedingly eccentric orbit, you could have extreme tides for the portion of the moon's orbit when it was closest, then far weaker tides the rest of the time.
New contributor
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Yes, but WHAT will be welled up?
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Up-welling. Nutrients tend to sink to the bottom, or to deep water where not enough light reaches to keep photosynthetic life forms thriving. If there is some mechanism to vigorously return deep water to the surface then it can bring the nutrients with it.
Up-welling might well be a seasonal thing. For example, currents could flow in one direction half the year when the snow melts in this hemisphere and builds up in the other. Then in the other direction for the other half of the year. This could produce a seasonal stirring of the deeper ocean layers.
Up-welling could be driven by temperature differences produced by geological heating that does not rise to the level of volcanoes. Water is at its highest density at close to 1.5°C. So if you have something that warms the depths it will bring the deep water back to the surface. This probably isn't seasonal.
In exotic places with exotic tides, that might do it. If a large moon had an exceedingly eccentric orbit, you could have extreme tides for the portion of the moon's orbit when it was closest, then far weaker tides the rest of the time.
New contributor
$endgroup$
Up-welling. Nutrients tend to sink to the bottom, or to deep water where not enough light reaches to keep photosynthetic life forms thriving. If there is some mechanism to vigorously return deep water to the surface then it can bring the nutrients with it.
Up-welling might well be a seasonal thing. For example, currents could flow in one direction half the year when the snow melts in this hemisphere and builds up in the other. Then in the other direction for the other half of the year. This could produce a seasonal stirring of the deeper ocean layers.
Up-welling could be driven by temperature differences produced by geological heating that does not rise to the level of volcanoes. Water is at its highest density at close to 1.5°C. So if you have something that warms the depths it will bring the deep water back to the surface. This probably isn't seasonal.
In exotic places with exotic tides, that might do it. If a large moon had an exceedingly eccentric orbit, you could have extreme tides for the portion of the moon's orbit when it was closest, then far weaker tides the rest of the time.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 8 hours ago
puppetsockpuppetsock
1311
1311
New contributor
New contributor
$begingroup$
Yes, but WHAT will be welled up?
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Yes, but WHAT will be welled up?
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Yes, but WHAT will be welled up?
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Yes, but WHAT will be welled up?
$endgroup$
– JohnWDailey
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Nothin but dust, baby.
Phytoplankton blooms are complex beasts. We've got a general idea of what causes them, and a general idea of what collapses them, but the intricacies are hard to capture. This is going to be a frame-challenge type answer; if you're not excited about those, you've been warned. If you're excited about the little green things, read on.
Dust storms aren't regular, annual events
The question as asked conflates two phenomena connected to phytoplankton blooms - one, that blooms appear and decay with regularity; and two, that blooms are sometimes caused by dust storms. Both of these are well documented, but they're entirely separate events.
Periodic blooms
Phytoplankton blooms have several regular, periodic cycles that they go through. These are best outlined by the recent review here, but I'll do my best to summarize the process and explain why they've got a seasonal behavior.
These little green things thrive on two things: nutrients and sunlight. In the ocean, sunlight is abundant right near the surface; but nutrients are more easily found at depth.
Side comment: one other answer noted that "nutrients tend to sink", which isn't quite true. It certainly looks that way, if you look at element profiles in the ocean, especially for common nutrients like P, N, or Fe. However, these nutrients are instead found in low concentrations at the surface because they're all tied up in cell structures rather than dissolved in the water column. When dead organisms sink in the water column, those elements are remineralized and returned to their dissolved form.
Phytoplankton deal with this discrepancy by forming something known as the Deep Chlorophyll Maximum (DCM) at a depth deep enough to have nutrients while avoiding missing out on the sunlight from above. When nutrients can be found closer to the surface, the phytoplankton also tend to get shallower.
So, seasonality. The ocean is normally thermally stratified - organized vertically by density - which makes it difficult for deep water (full of nutrients) and shallow water (full of sunlight) to mix. However, this stratification breaks down when the surface water is about the same temperature as the deeper water. This happens in the winter - check out the graphic below, from this excellent website:
Of course, during the winter there's not a whole of sunlight - so when the sun comes back in the spring, we get a phytoplankton bloom that happens over an entire hemisphere! Check out the link here for an excellent animation from the NASA Earth Observatory demonstrating this. That's the main annual cycle.
In lakes, we often get two blooms - one in spring and one in fall. The logic above still applies, but in lakes we get reverse stratification in the winter that means that mixing happens more in spring and fall than in winter. A similar graphic from Nat Geo below explains this better:
This means that lakes often have semiannual blooms, in both spring and fall.
Irregular blooms
The final kind of blooms we get in the ocean aren't regular at all. That's because these blooms aren't triggered by any kind of seasonal or annual cycle (especially if we're not including fertilizer runoff in the growing season), but are instead triggered by random events such as dust storms, volcanoes, or rivers.
Dust storms are especially powerful fertilizers because the ocean as a whole isn't limited by a single nutrient. Some areas desperately need phosphorus and have nitrogen to spare, while other areas are iron-limited but otherwise high-nutrient. The figure below summarizes this for diatoms, a major constituent of phytoplankton (from this paper):
Dust is great because it's full of all these things! Most notably, the iron and phosphate nutrient cycles have no airborne component, meaning that you can't pull those nutrients out of thin air like you can with nitrogen. Dust is generally made of rocks (or, rocks are made of dust?), so this is one way to transport a whole lot of phosphate and iron into the surface ocean. Rather than rising up from the depths, it's being dropped from above. That makes it really hard to mimic, especially on a global scale.
TL;DR:
Dust-triggered blooms are unique events. They're not periodic, but they are special because the transport nutrients that would normally be very hard to find in the middle of the ocean. Given that periodic blooms happen to at most a hemisphere at a time (i.e. not global), and that dust-triggered blooms aren't annual, a frame-challenge answer to this question is necessary.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Nothin but dust, baby.
Phytoplankton blooms are complex beasts. We've got a general idea of what causes them, and a general idea of what collapses them, but the intricacies are hard to capture. This is going to be a frame-challenge type answer; if you're not excited about those, you've been warned. If you're excited about the little green things, read on.
Dust storms aren't regular, annual events
The question as asked conflates two phenomena connected to phytoplankton blooms - one, that blooms appear and decay with regularity; and two, that blooms are sometimes caused by dust storms. Both of these are well documented, but they're entirely separate events.
Periodic blooms
Phytoplankton blooms have several regular, periodic cycles that they go through. These are best outlined by the recent review here, but I'll do my best to summarize the process and explain why they've got a seasonal behavior.
These little green things thrive on two things: nutrients and sunlight. In the ocean, sunlight is abundant right near the surface; but nutrients are more easily found at depth.
Side comment: one other answer noted that "nutrients tend to sink", which isn't quite true. It certainly looks that way, if you look at element profiles in the ocean, especially for common nutrients like P, N, or Fe. However, these nutrients are instead found in low concentrations at the surface because they're all tied up in cell structures rather than dissolved in the water column. When dead organisms sink in the water column, those elements are remineralized and returned to their dissolved form.
Phytoplankton deal with this discrepancy by forming something known as the Deep Chlorophyll Maximum (DCM) at a depth deep enough to have nutrients while avoiding missing out on the sunlight from above. When nutrients can be found closer to the surface, the phytoplankton also tend to get shallower.
So, seasonality. The ocean is normally thermally stratified - organized vertically by density - which makes it difficult for deep water (full of nutrients) and shallow water (full of sunlight) to mix. However, this stratification breaks down when the surface water is about the same temperature as the deeper water. This happens in the winter - check out the graphic below, from this excellent website:
Of course, during the winter there's not a whole of sunlight - so when the sun comes back in the spring, we get a phytoplankton bloom that happens over an entire hemisphere! Check out the link here for an excellent animation from the NASA Earth Observatory demonstrating this. That's the main annual cycle.
In lakes, we often get two blooms - one in spring and one in fall. The logic above still applies, but in lakes we get reverse stratification in the winter that means that mixing happens more in spring and fall than in winter. A similar graphic from Nat Geo below explains this better:
This means that lakes often have semiannual blooms, in both spring and fall.
Irregular blooms
The final kind of blooms we get in the ocean aren't regular at all. That's because these blooms aren't triggered by any kind of seasonal or annual cycle (especially if we're not including fertilizer runoff in the growing season), but are instead triggered by random events such as dust storms, volcanoes, or rivers.
Dust storms are especially powerful fertilizers because the ocean as a whole isn't limited by a single nutrient. Some areas desperately need phosphorus and have nitrogen to spare, while other areas are iron-limited but otherwise high-nutrient. The figure below summarizes this for diatoms, a major constituent of phytoplankton (from this paper):
Dust is great because it's full of all these things! Most notably, the iron and phosphate nutrient cycles have no airborne component, meaning that you can't pull those nutrients out of thin air like you can with nitrogen. Dust is generally made of rocks (or, rocks are made of dust?), so this is one way to transport a whole lot of phosphate and iron into the surface ocean. Rather than rising up from the depths, it's being dropped from above. That makes it really hard to mimic, especially on a global scale.
TL;DR:
Dust-triggered blooms are unique events. They're not periodic, but they are special because the transport nutrients that would normally be very hard to find in the middle of the ocean. Given that periodic blooms happen to at most a hemisphere at a time (i.e. not global), and that dust-triggered blooms aren't annual, a frame-challenge answer to this question is necessary.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Nothin but dust, baby.
Phytoplankton blooms are complex beasts. We've got a general idea of what causes them, and a general idea of what collapses them, but the intricacies are hard to capture. This is going to be a frame-challenge type answer; if you're not excited about those, you've been warned. If you're excited about the little green things, read on.
Dust storms aren't regular, annual events
The question as asked conflates two phenomena connected to phytoplankton blooms - one, that blooms appear and decay with regularity; and two, that blooms are sometimes caused by dust storms. Both of these are well documented, but they're entirely separate events.
Periodic blooms
Phytoplankton blooms have several regular, periodic cycles that they go through. These are best outlined by the recent review here, but I'll do my best to summarize the process and explain why they've got a seasonal behavior.
These little green things thrive on two things: nutrients and sunlight. In the ocean, sunlight is abundant right near the surface; but nutrients are more easily found at depth.
Side comment: one other answer noted that "nutrients tend to sink", which isn't quite true. It certainly looks that way, if you look at element profiles in the ocean, especially for common nutrients like P, N, or Fe. However, these nutrients are instead found in low concentrations at the surface because they're all tied up in cell structures rather than dissolved in the water column. When dead organisms sink in the water column, those elements are remineralized and returned to their dissolved form.
Phytoplankton deal with this discrepancy by forming something known as the Deep Chlorophyll Maximum (DCM) at a depth deep enough to have nutrients while avoiding missing out on the sunlight from above. When nutrients can be found closer to the surface, the phytoplankton also tend to get shallower.
So, seasonality. The ocean is normally thermally stratified - organized vertically by density - which makes it difficult for deep water (full of nutrients) and shallow water (full of sunlight) to mix. However, this stratification breaks down when the surface water is about the same temperature as the deeper water. This happens in the winter - check out the graphic below, from this excellent website:
Of course, during the winter there's not a whole of sunlight - so when the sun comes back in the spring, we get a phytoplankton bloom that happens over an entire hemisphere! Check out the link here for an excellent animation from the NASA Earth Observatory demonstrating this. That's the main annual cycle.
In lakes, we often get two blooms - one in spring and one in fall. The logic above still applies, but in lakes we get reverse stratification in the winter that means that mixing happens more in spring and fall than in winter. A similar graphic from Nat Geo below explains this better:
This means that lakes often have semiannual blooms, in both spring and fall.
Irregular blooms
The final kind of blooms we get in the ocean aren't regular at all. That's because these blooms aren't triggered by any kind of seasonal or annual cycle (especially if we're not including fertilizer runoff in the growing season), but are instead triggered by random events such as dust storms, volcanoes, or rivers.
Dust storms are especially powerful fertilizers because the ocean as a whole isn't limited by a single nutrient. Some areas desperately need phosphorus and have nitrogen to spare, while other areas are iron-limited but otherwise high-nutrient. The figure below summarizes this for diatoms, a major constituent of phytoplankton (from this paper):
Dust is great because it's full of all these things! Most notably, the iron and phosphate nutrient cycles have no airborne component, meaning that you can't pull those nutrients out of thin air like you can with nitrogen. Dust is generally made of rocks (or, rocks are made of dust?), so this is one way to transport a whole lot of phosphate and iron into the surface ocean. Rather than rising up from the depths, it's being dropped from above. That makes it really hard to mimic, especially on a global scale.
TL;DR:
Dust-triggered blooms are unique events. They're not periodic, but they are special because the transport nutrients that would normally be very hard to find in the middle of the ocean. Given that periodic blooms happen to at most a hemisphere at a time (i.e. not global), and that dust-triggered blooms aren't annual, a frame-challenge answer to this question is necessary.
$endgroup$
Nothin but dust, baby.
Phytoplankton blooms are complex beasts. We've got a general idea of what causes them, and a general idea of what collapses them, but the intricacies are hard to capture. This is going to be a frame-challenge type answer; if you're not excited about those, you've been warned. If you're excited about the little green things, read on.
Dust storms aren't regular, annual events
The question as asked conflates two phenomena connected to phytoplankton blooms - one, that blooms appear and decay with regularity; and two, that blooms are sometimes caused by dust storms. Both of these are well documented, but they're entirely separate events.
Periodic blooms
Phytoplankton blooms have several regular, periodic cycles that they go through. These are best outlined by the recent review here, but I'll do my best to summarize the process and explain why they've got a seasonal behavior.
These little green things thrive on two things: nutrients and sunlight. In the ocean, sunlight is abundant right near the surface; but nutrients are more easily found at depth.
Side comment: one other answer noted that "nutrients tend to sink", which isn't quite true. It certainly looks that way, if you look at element profiles in the ocean, especially for common nutrients like P, N, or Fe. However, these nutrients are instead found in low concentrations at the surface because they're all tied up in cell structures rather than dissolved in the water column. When dead organisms sink in the water column, those elements are remineralized and returned to their dissolved form.
Phytoplankton deal with this discrepancy by forming something known as the Deep Chlorophyll Maximum (DCM) at a depth deep enough to have nutrients while avoiding missing out on the sunlight from above. When nutrients can be found closer to the surface, the phytoplankton also tend to get shallower.
So, seasonality. The ocean is normally thermally stratified - organized vertically by density - which makes it difficult for deep water (full of nutrients) and shallow water (full of sunlight) to mix. However, this stratification breaks down when the surface water is about the same temperature as the deeper water. This happens in the winter - check out the graphic below, from this excellent website:
Of course, during the winter there's not a whole of sunlight - so when the sun comes back in the spring, we get a phytoplankton bloom that happens over an entire hemisphere! Check out the link here for an excellent animation from the NASA Earth Observatory demonstrating this. That's the main annual cycle.
In lakes, we often get two blooms - one in spring and one in fall. The logic above still applies, but in lakes we get reverse stratification in the winter that means that mixing happens more in spring and fall than in winter. A similar graphic from Nat Geo below explains this better:
This means that lakes often have semiannual blooms, in both spring and fall.
Irregular blooms
The final kind of blooms we get in the ocean aren't regular at all. That's because these blooms aren't triggered by any kind of seasonal or annual cycle (especially if we're not including fertilizer runoff in the growing season), but are instead triggered by random events such as dust storms, volcanoes, or rivers.
Dust storms are especially powerful fertilizers because the ocean as a whole isn't limited by a single nutrient. Some areas desperately need phosphorus and have nitrogen to spare, while other areas are iron-limited but otherwise high-nutrient. The figure below summarizes this for diatoms, a major constituent of phytoplankton (from this paper):
Dust is great because it's full of all these things! Most notably, the iron and phosphate nutrient cycles have no airborne component, meaning that you can't pull those nutrients out of thin air like you can with nitrogen. Dust is generally made of rocks (or, rocks are made of dust?), so this is one way to transport a whole lot of phosphate and iron into the surface ocean. Rather than rising up from the depths, it's being dropped from above. That makes it really hard to mimic, especially on a global scale.
TL;DR:
Dust-triggered blooms are unique events. They're not periodic, but they are special because the transport nutrients that would normally be very hard to find in the middle of the ocean. Given that periodic blooms happen to at most a hemisphere at a time (i.e. not global), and that dust-triggered blooms aren't annual, a frame-challenge answer to this question is necessary.
answered 2 hours ago
DubukayDubukay
9,20042764
9,20042764
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f143609%2frealistic-alternatives-to-dust-what-else-could-feed-a-plankton-bloom%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Pollen would probably work.
$endgroup$
– RBarryYoung
2 hours ago