Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Species-specific growth response of coccolithophores to Palaeocene–Eocene environmental change

Nature Geoscience volume 6, pages 218–222 (2013)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Coccolithophores—single-celled calcifying phytoplankton—represent an essential footing to marine ecosystems, yet their sensitivity to environmental change, and in particular increases in atmospheric CO2, is poorly understood1. During the Palaeocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM), about 56 million years ago, atmospheric CO2 concentrations rose rapidly and the oceans acidified2,3, making this an ideal time interval to examine coccolithophore responses to environmental change. Here we compare the results of experiments on modern coccolithophore species with exceptional fossil coccosphere records of the PETM, providing a cellular-level perspective. In modern taxa, we find that during the exponential growth phase of rapid cell division, small cells with few coccoliths are produced, whereas larger cells with more coccoliths are produced during slowed cell division. Applying these diagnostic features to the PETM fossil record, we find that the dominant species exhibited different growth responses to the environmental forcing. Toweius pertusus shows geometry indicative of rapid cell division. In contrast, we suggest that cells of Coccolithus pelagicus grew more slowly during the period of environmental change. In the modern ocean, Emiliania huxleyi, which is closely related to the extinct T. pertusus, is prolific and widespread, whereas C. pelagicus is more limited in range and abundance. We argue that these different responses to environmental change were critical to the post-PETM evolutionary success of the descendants of these taxa.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it

$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: SEM images of fossil and modern coccospheres utilized in this study.
Figure 2: Coccosphere data from fossil T. pertusus, C. pelagicus and small Toweius sp. and cultured C. pelagicus braarudii.
Figure 3: Comparison of C. pelagicus φ and CLwith cells subdivided according to CN to give an indication of recently divided cells (CN≤8) and cells growing slowly/unable to divide (CN≥16).
Figure 4: Comparison of C. pelagicus populations as characterized by their abundance of CN≤8 and CN≥16 cells.

References

  1. Ridgwell, et al. From laboratory manipulations to Earth system models: Scaling calcification impacts of ocean acidification. Biogeosciences 6, 2611–2623 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Sluijs, A., Bowen, G. J., Brinkhuis, H., Lourens, L. J. & Thomas, E. in Deep-Time Perspectives on Climate Change: Marrying the Signal from Computer Models and Biological Proxies (eds Williams, M., Haywood, A. M., Gregory, F. J. & Schmidt, D. N.) 323–349 (The Micropaleontological Society, Special Publications, The Geological Society, 2007).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Zachos, J. C., Dickens, G. R. & Zeebe, R. E. An early Cenozoic perspective on greenhouse warming and carbon-cycle dynamics. Nature 451, 279–283 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bown, P. R. et al. A Paleogene calcareous microfossil Konservat-Lagerstätte from the Kilwa Group of coastal Tanzania. GSA Bull. 120, 3–12 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hönisch, B. et al. The geological record of ocean acidification. Science 335, 1058–1063 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bralower, T. J. Evidence of surface water oligotrophy during the PETM: Nannofossil assemblage data from Ocean Drilling Program Site 690, Maud Rise, Weddell Sea. Paleoceanography 17, 1023 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gibbs, S. J., Bralower, T. J., Bown, P. R., Zachos, J. C. & Bybell, L. Shelf and open-ocean calcareous phytoplankton assemblages across the Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum: Implications for global productivity gradients. Geology 34, 233–236 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bown, P. & Pearson, P. Calcareous plankton evolution and the Paleocene/Eocene thermal maximum event: New evidence from Tanzania. Mar. Micropaleontol. 71, 60–70 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gibbs, S. J., Bown, P. R., Sessa, J., Bralower, T. J. & Wilson, P. A. Nannoplankton extinction and origination rates across the Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum. Science 314, 1770–1773 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Young, J. R. et al. A guide to extant coccolithophore taxonomy. J. Nannoplankton Res., Special Publication 1, 1–125 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bown, P. R., Lees, J. A. & Young, J. R. in Coccolithophores—From Molecular Processes to Global Impacts (eds Thierstein, H. & Young, J. R.) 481–508 (Springer, 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Gallagher, L. in Nannofossils and Their Application (eds Crux, J. & Heck, S. E. van) 41–75 (Ellis Horwood, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Balch, W. M., Kilpatrick, K., Holligan, P. M. & Cucci, T. Coccolith production and detachment by Emiliania huxleyi (Prymnesiophyceae). J. Phycol. 29, 566–575 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fritz, J. J. Carbon fixation and coccolith detachment in the coccolithophore Emiliania huxleyi in nitrate-limited cyclostats. Mar. Biol. 133, 509–518 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Müller, M. N., Antia, A. N. & LaRoche, J. Influence of cell cycle phase on calcification in the coccolithophore Emiliania huxleyi. Limnol. Oceanogr. 53, 506–512 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Paache, E. Roles of nitrogen and phosphorus in coccolith formation in Emiliania huxleyi (Prymnesiophyceae). Eur. J. Phycol. 33, 33–42 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Riegman, R., Stole, W., Noordeloos, A. A. M. & Slezak, D. Nutrient uptake and alkaline phosphatase (EC 3:1:3:1) activity of Emiliania huxleyi (Prymnesiophyceae) during growth under N and P limitation in continuous cultures. J. Phycol. 36, 87–96 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Langer, G. et al. Calcium isotope fractionation during coccolith formation in Emiliania huxleyi: Independence of growth and calcification rate. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 8, Q05007 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Langer, G. et al. Species-specific responses of calcifying algae to changing seawater carbonate chemistry. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 7, Q09006 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Langer, G., Nehrke, G., Probert, I., Ly, J. & Ziveri, P. Strain-specific responses of Emiliania huxleyi to changing seawater carbonate chemistry. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 6, 2637–2646 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  21. John, C. M. et al. North American continental margin records of the Paleocene–Eocene thermal maximum: Implications for global carbon and hydrological cycling. Paleoceanography 23, PA2217 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Zachos, J. C. et al. Extreme warming of the mid-latitude coastal ocean during the Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum: Inferences from TEX86 and isotope data. Geology 34, 737–740 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Sato, T., Yuguchi, S., Takayama, T. & Kameo, K. Drastic change in the geographical distribution of the cold-water nannofossil Coccolithus pelagicus (Wallich) Schiller at 2.74 Ma in the late Pliocene, with special reference to glaciation in the Arctic Ocean. Mar. Micropaleontol. 52, 181–193.

  24. Ziveri, P., Baumann, K. H., Böckel, B., Bollmann, J. & Young, J. R. in Coccolithophores—From Molecular Processes to Global Impacts (eds Thierstein, H. & Young, J. R.) 403–428 (Springer, 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Miller, K. G. et al. in Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results 174AX (eds Miller, K. G. et al.) 5–43 (Ocean Drilling Program, 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Nicholas, C. J. et al. Stratigraphy and sedimentology of the Upper Cretaceous to Paleogene Kilwa Group, southern coastal Tanzania. J. Afr. Earth Sci. 45, 431–466 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Montadert, L. et al. Initial Reports of the Deep Sea Drilling Project Vol. 48 (US Government Printing Office, 1979).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  28. Lampitt, R. et al. Particulate export from the euphotic zone: Estimates using a novel drifting sediment trap, 234 Th and new production. Deep-Sea Res. I 55, 1483–1502 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Henderiks, J. Coccolithophore size rules—reconstructing ancient cell geometry and cellular calcite quota from fossil coccoliths. Mar. Micropaleontol. 67, 143–154 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Nunes, F. & Norris, R. D. Abrupt reversal in ocean overturning during the Palaeocene/Eocene warm period. Nature 439, 60–63 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge research support from the Royal Society through a University Research Fellowship to S.J.G., from the Natural Environment Research Council through a Post-doctoral Fellowship to A.J.P. (NE/F015054/1) and studentships to S.A.O., J.H. and C.J.D. and a research experience placement for C.N., and an added value grant from the UK Ocean Acidification programme (which includes funding from NERC, DECC and DEFRA). Part of this collaborative research between modern and palaeo research arose as a result of the UKOA project and we thank the consortium group principal investigators (P. Pearson, G. Foster and T. Tyrell) and also the UKOA project manager P. Williamson. We would also like to thank I. Probert for advice on coccolithophore culturing, R. Pearce for assistance with SEM imaging, and M. Coupel, J. Hurst, E. Maher, R. Lampitt, S. Ward and C. Marsay for assistance in collection and analysis of water and sediment trap samples from the Iceland Basin in 2010. Thanks also to D. Iglesias-Rodriguez and C. Newe for invaluable discussions, E. J. Rohling for manuscript editing, and A. Westmacott and Olympus Keymed for hardware and software support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Ocean and Earth Science, National Oceanography Centre, Southampton, University of Southampton, Southampton, SO14 3ZH, UK

    Samantha J. Gibbs, Chris J. Daniels, Jason Hopkins, Heather L. Jones, Geoff J. Thiemann, Sarah A. O’Dea & Cherry Newsam

  2. Ocean Biogeochemistry and Ecosystems, National Oceanography Centre, Waterfront Campus, Southampton, SO14 3ZH, UK

    Alex J. Poulton

  3. Department of Earth Sciences, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK

    Paul R. Bown, Jeremy R. Young & Cherry Newsam

Authors
  1. Samantha J. Gibbs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alex J. Poulton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paul R. Bown
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chris J. Daniels
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jason Hopkins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jeremy R. Young
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Heather L. Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Geoff J. Thiemann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Sarah A. O’Dea
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Cherry Newsam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

S.J.G., P.R.B. and A.J.P. conceived and designed the research and experiments, with advice from J.R.Y. S.J.G. performed all biometric analyses; A.J.P., J.H. and C.J.D. performed the culture experiments, collected daily cell counts and imaged samples under SEM. P.R.B. performed fossil SEM imaging. H.L.J., G.J.T., S.A.O. and C.N. provided further fossil biometric data. S.J.G., A.J.P., P.R.B. and J.R.Y. interpreted findings and wrote the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Samantha J. Gibbs.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Information (PDF 804 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gibbs, S., Poulton, A., Bown, P. et al. Species-specific growth response of coccolithophores to Palaeocene–Eocene environmental change. Nature Geosci 6, 218–222 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1719

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1719

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing