From the University of Toronto, Underwater ‘tree rings’
Calcite crusts of arctic algae record 650 years of sea ice change

Almost 650 years of annual change in sea-ice cover can been seen in the calcite crust growth layers of seafloor algae, says a new study from the University of Toronto Mississauga (UTM).
“This is the first time coralline algae have been used to track changes in Arctic sea ice,” says Jochen Halfar, an associate professor in UTM’s Department of Chemical and Physical Sciences. “We found the algal record shows a dramatic decrease in ice cover over the last 150 years.”
With colleagues from the Smithsonian Institution, Germany and Newfoundland, Halfar collected and analyzed samples of the alga Clathromorphum compactum. This long-lived plant species forms thick rock-like calcite crusts on the seafloor in shallow waters 15 to 17 metres deep. It is widely distributed in the Arctic and sub-Arctic Oceans.
Divers retrieved the specimens from near-freezing seawater during several research cruises led by Walter Adey from the Smithsonian.
The algae’s growth rates depend on the temperature of the water and the light they receive. As snow-covered sea ice accumulates on the water over the algae, it turns the sea floor dark and cold, stopping the plants’ growth. When the sea ice melts in the warm months, the algae resume growing their calcified crusts.
This continuous cycle of dormancy and growth results in visible layers that can be used to determine the length of time the algae were able to grow each year during the ice-free season.
“It’s the same principle as using rings to determine a tree’s age and the levels of precipitation,” says Halfar. “In addition to ring counting, we used radiocarbon dating to confirm the age of the algal layers.”
After cutting and polishing the algae, Halfar used a specialized microscope to take thousands of images of each sample. The images were combined to give a complete overview of the fist-sized specimens.
![]() |
||||
Halfar corroborated the length of the algal growth periods through the magnesium levels preserved in each growth layer. The amount of magnesium is dependent on both the light reaching the algae and the temperature of the sea water. Longer periods of open and warm water result in a higher amount of algal magnesium.
During the Little Ice Age, a period of global cooling that lasted from the mid-1500s to the mid-1800s, the algae’s annual growth increments were as narrow as 30 microns due to the extensive sea-ice cover, Halfar says. However, since 1850, the thickness of the algae’s growth increments have more than doubled, bearing witness to an unprecedented decline in sea ice coverage that has accelerated in recent decades.
Halfar says the coralline algae represent not only a new method for climate reconstruction, but are vital to extending knowledge of the climate record back in time to permit more accurate modeling of future climate change.
Currently, observational information about annual changes in the Earth’s temperature and climate go back 150 years. Reliable information about sea-ice coverage comes from satellites and dates back only to the late 1970s.
“In the north, there is nothing in the shallow oceans that tells us about climate, water temperature or sea ice coverage on an annual basis,” says Halfar. “These algae, which live over a thousand years, can now provide us with that information.”
The research, which was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) and Ecological Systems Technology.
###
here is the paper:
Significance
The most concerning example of ongoing climate change is the rapid Arctic sea-ice retreat. While just a few years ago ice-free Arctic summers were expected by the end of this century, current models predict this to happen by 2030. This shows that our understanding of rapid changes in the cryosphere is limited, which is largely due to a lack of long-term observations. Newly discovered long-lived algae growing on the Arctic seafloor and forming tree-ring–like growth bands in a hard, calcified crust have recorded centuries of sea-ice history. The algae show that, while fast short-term changes have occurred in the past, the 20th century exhibited the lowest sea-ice cover in the past 646 years.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

This is yet again more philosophy posing as science. One variable – calcite crust growth layers of seafloor algae – and now suddenly the quackitists know all about 1000 years of Arctic climate?….This is ridiculous. Perhaps a million ? variables play a role in climate and in the Arctic there are powerful events including wind, undersea volcanic activity, cosmic interferences, ocean currents etc. that would have more to do with ‘climate’ than looking at crust layers of algae and using ‘models’ driving out whatever your pre-conceptions tell you ‘must’ be the right answer. Whither all the rest of the variables ? This is not science but of course more ‘grant $’ will be necessary to investigate further….quacks.
“…to an unprecedented decline in sea ice coverage..”
Why is it that these folks can never be happy we came out of the LIA.
milodonharlani,
The point missing here is the cause of ice being thinner or thicker in the Arctic. It is generally not just the air temperature, but also dependent on the water temperature under the ice, and amount of snow year to year. The colder it is, generally the less snow at very high latitudes (lower absolute humidity). However, the speed and temperature of water flowing under sea ice is the main cause of melting or growth. The water flow is directly caused by the large scale ocean currents, not the air. Since a larger temperature difference low to high latitudes drives larger current driving wind, this drives more lower latitude warmed water further to higher latitudes. Thus it is possible that thinner sea ice may be due to colder high latitudes in some (but likely not all) cases. This issue is a classic case of not understanding all the facts and jumping to a conclusion.
Replies to “The Watcher” in this thread reminded me of this: (or words similar)
There are three groups of people in the world;
those that make things happen, those that watch things happen, and those who wonder what happened.
But, really, there is a fourth group;
those that don’t even realize that anything happened.
Just an observation.
…The algae show that, while fast short-term changes have occurred in the past, the 20th century exhibited the lowest sea-ice cover in the past 646 years….
What would be really useful would be to know whether the lowest sea-ice cover was only in the last 20 years of the 20th century, or whether it occurred at other times nearer the beginning…?
This research is a wonderful addition to the body of facts. It needs to be repeated in multiple areas around the arctic if only to see if there is any location bias over (long-cycle) time for the ice pack.
I like the real data aspect of this study. If the authors had just reported results it would stand as a promising area for further research. Extrapolation to the “meaning” of the results vis-a-vis climate models, and the use of “unprecedented” really stretches the small bit of information available. Years ago results based on such a small sample (both in numbers and locations) would have warranted a small note in a journal. My major criticism (and perhaps it is addressed in the article) is why the data are not extended back in time. If they can span the last few thousand years there might be something interesting in the results. I can’t find anything interesting in such a small sample.
“While just a few years ago ice-free Arctic summers were expected by the end of this century, current models predict this to happen by 2030.”
And in 2030 “current models predict this to happen by 2050”.
And in 2050 “current models predict this to happen by 2070”.
And in 2070 “current models predict that THE ICE WALLS ARE COMING WE ARE DOOMED DOOMED DOOMED!!!! UNLESS YOU GIVE US ALL YOUR MONEY!!!”
The lyrics may change from time to time, but the Song Remains the Same.
“The Watcher” of the 16th century, addressing Galileo:
The Watcher:
“PLEASE just GIVE UP your insane beliefs and START TRUSTING HIS HOLINESS THE POPE!!!.”
From the University of Toronto:
“However, since 1850, the thickness of the algae’s growth increments have more than doubled, bearing witness to an unprecedented decline in sea ice coverage that has accelerated in recent decades.”
In reality, all samples in the study show no change or an increase in sea ice since 1940. Why always bring the idea of an acceleration in recent years when the data contradicts this claim?
650 years takes us back to the early part of the LIA. If not cherry-picking it is at least a very convenient timeframe from the Clysenkoist perspective.
sorry…this is BS
… and the Titanic sank when … south of the Grand Banks!
Col Mosby says:
November 19, 2013 at 5:19 am
“To put things in perspective : … Rises in soot seem to explain
why the Arctic is losing ice whilst the much larger (and more important) Antarctic is not”
I live in the Arctic … can’t see any visible soot on the snow! Are you implying that soot has caused the rise in air temperatures since the mid 90’s?
[Snip. To comment, provide a valid email address. — mod.]
So starting in 1850, during a time when humans were emitting essentially zero greenhouse gases, the water began warming and the ice started becoming less extensive. This suggests that it’s natural factors behind modern warming. I wonder how they did not come to this obvious conclusion, hmm.
Jean Parisot says:
November 19, 2013 at 5:33 am
“Why can’t they just publish a paper saying this a tool, here are its capabilities and limits. Lets correlate the tool with modern satellite measurements for several decades and then decide if a wider study of arctic waters would result in a longer baseline and/or more confident results.
Then let some University PR weenie write the Global Warming BS for a magazine or a website.”
Why? It’s obvious they are fully indoctrinated into the Church of CAGW. It’s much the same way that ancient Romans contributed every natural phenomena to mythology, these Warmists contribute all climate variability to anthropogenic forces, even if the data suggests otherwise.
Dear Ian W.,
Thank you, SO MUCH, for affirming the worth of my question about controlling variables and about the significance of this paper’s assertions. Your thoughtful response and education (along with MANY other true teachers above, as Ken L. pointed out re: Miller, who indirectly answered my Q’s — thank you!) are much appreciated and helped me immensely to better understand.
I went to bed last night (in PST land), kind of depressed. No, lol, not about MH’s snarling (I truly take hope from that, as I said — someday…. someday……..(smile)). I was just bummed that NO ONE thought my question worth his or her time to address (except dismissively).
What a refreshing sight met my eyes upon reviewing this thread this morning!
Gratefully,
Janice
Ian W says:
November 19, 2013 at 4:45 am
Clathromorphum compactum grows on top of rocks. Researchers have to chip it off rock surfaces:
http://walteradey.com/climates.php
Light being too strong isn’t a problem for this frigid sea species.
tty says:
November 19, 2013 at 12:33 am
One thing evident in the linked information in the SI is that an inspection of the example cross-section shows that the growth is not uniform orthogonal to to accumulation rings. Relocating a sample site could readily result in a very different pattern of growth rates. The same rings vary considerably in thickness across the specimen and show considerably less uniformity than tree rings do.
milodonharlani says:
November 18, 2013 at 7:21 pm
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/11/18/inverse-underwater-hockey-sticks/#comment-1478837
Janice Moore says:
November 18, 2013 at 7:38 pm
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/11/18/inverse-underwater-hockey-sticks/#comment-1478844
milodonharlani says:
November 18, 2013 at 7:54 pm
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/11/18/inverse-underwater-hockey-sticks/#comment-1478854
======================================================================
Milodonharlani, do you write speeches for Ahmadinejad?
Janice, John 15:18 and Romans 1:28. (I’d suggest the Amplified Bible for the later.)
Gunga Din says:
November 19, 2013 at 2:00 pm
Creationists who equate their cult with Christianity give CACA skeptics a bad name. Linking to the Discovery Institute’s hired liars on the leading skeptical blog just makes it worse.
Dear Gunga Din,
Thank you, so much, for those encouraging (and admonishing to some) texts (and, btw, I have Romans 1:19, 20 memorized). Thanks for speaking up — much appreciated. MH, besides mistakenly conflating Intelligent Design theorists (Berlinski doesn’t even believe in God) with “creationists,” clearly has either been misinformed or is uninformed. Or….. his pride and or fear and or anger are clouding his obviously otherwise fine intellectual abilities.
Bottom line: let’s pray!
Gratefully yours,
Janice
*****************************
Dear Mr. Harlani,
How about chatting a bit about your woodwind playing? What composers do you most enjoy playing? Listening to? Let’s be friends, okay? I have several friends who, while not as fervent, believe the same way you do and yet still like me (amazing huh?). (They see my beliefs not as anti-science but as NON-science — i.e., my beliefs do not bring shame to the glorious cause of truth-in-science.) How about it?
Hopefully,
Janice
milodonharlani says:
November 19, 2013 at 12:50 pm
Ian W says:
November 19, 2013 at 4:45 am
Clathromorphum compactum grows on top of rocks. Researchers have to chip it off rock surfaces:
http://walteradey.com/climates.php
Light being too strong isn’t a problem for this frigid sea species.
1. You may be correct about the current algae, however you may not know what species was on the rocks decades ago let alone centuries ago it is an unproven assumption that it is the same species and that it is unchanged from today’s.
2. A study of Clathromorphum circumscriptum a species in the same family showed that its size varied with salinity (http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/b80-162#.Uov4eD_8CKI) a significant variable in polar waters and not linked necessarily to temperature or sunlight perhaps more to variable ocean currents. This would need to be normalized out in some way for the thickness of the calcite layers to be useful as they are only microns thick. It is not clear how you would normalize for salinity but I am sure you will find a suitable proxy.
“These algae, which live over a thousand years,”
How do they know that?