Abstract
Replying to A. McQuatters-Gollop et al. Nature 472, 10.1038/nature09950 (2011); D. L. Mackas Nature 472, 10.1038/nature09951 (2011); R. R. Rykaczewski & J. P. Dunne Nature 472, 10.1038/nature09952 (2011)
In their thoughtful responses to our article on global chlorophyll (Chl) trends1, Mackas2, Rykaczewski and Dunne3, and McQuatters et al.7 suggest that some of the variation observed in our analysis may be explained by a possible bias, whereby transparency-derived chlorophyll (CT) measurements overestimate phytoplankton abundance relative to direct in situ chlorophyll (CI) measurements. Although we cannot entirely discount the possibility that changes in sampling methods may introduce fractional bias, extensive sensitivity analyses detailed below show that this is not responsible for the observed Chl declines. Furthermore, the accuracy of CT as a proxy of surface Chl has been independently verified4,5, and indicates that CT explains only 0.5–1.5% less of the variance in surface Chl than precision measurements of water-leaving radiance (remotely sensed ocean colour)5.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Boyce, D. G., Lewis, M. R. & Worm, B. Global phytoplankton decline over the past century. Nature 466, 591–596 (2010)
Mackas, D. L. Does blending of chlorophyll data bias temporal trend? Nature 472 10.1038/nature09951 (2011)
Rykaczewski, R. R. & Dunne, J. P. A measured look at ocean chlorophyll trends. Nature 472 10.1038/nature09952 (2011)
Lewis, M. R., Kuring, N. & Yentsch, C. Global patterns of ocean transparency: implications for the new production of the open ocean. J. Geophys. Res. 93, 6847–6856 (1988)
Falkowski, P. & Wilson, C. Phytoplankton productivity in the North Pacific ocean since 1900 and implications for absorption of anthropogenic CO2 . Nature 358, 741–743 (1992)
Ripley, B. D. & Thompson, M. Regression techniques for the detection of analytical bias. Analyst (Lond.) 112, 377–383 (1987)
McQuatters, A. et al. Is there a decline in marine phytoplankton? Nature 472 10.1038/nature09950 (2011)
Tarran, G. A., Zubkov, M. V., Sleigh, M. A., Burkhill, P. H. & Yallop, M. Microbial community structure and standing stocks in the NE Atlantic in June and July of 1996. Deep Sea Res. Part II Top. Stud. Oceanogr. 48, 963–985 (2001)
Gregg, W. W., Conkright, M. E., Ginoux, P., O’Reilly, J. E. & Casey, N. W. Ocean primary production and climate: global decadal changes. Geophys. Res. Lett. 30, 1809–1813 (2003)
Behrenfeld, M. J. et al. Biospheric primary production during an ENSO transition. Science 291, 2594–2597 (2001)
Martinez, E., Antoine, D., D’Ortenzio, F. & Gentili, B. Climate-driven basin-scale decadal oscillations of oceanic phytoplankton. Science 326, 1253–1256 (2009)
Behrenfeld, M. J. et al. Climate-driven trends in contemporary ocean productivity. Nature 444, 752–755 (2006)
Henson, S. A. et al. Detection of anthropogenic climate change in satellite records of ocean chlorophyll and productivity. Biogeosciences 7, 621–640 (2010)
Gregg, W. W. & Conkright, M. E. Decadal changes in global ocean chlorophyll. Geophys. Res. Lett. 29, 1730–1734 (2002)
Reid, P. C., Edwards, M., Hunt, H. G. & Warner, A. J. Phytoplankton change in the North Atlantic. Nature 391, 546 (1998)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Boyce, D., Lewis, M. & Worm, B. Boyce et al. reply. Nature 472, E8–E9 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09953
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09953
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.
