Some corals adjusting to rising ocean temperatures, Stanford researchers say
Research led by Stanford scientist Steve Palumbi reveals how some corals can quickly switch on or off certain genes in order to survive in warmer-than-average tidal waters.
To most people, 86-degree Fahrenheit water is pleasant for bathing and swimming. To most sea creatures, however, it’s deadly. As climate change heats up ocean temperatures, the future of species such as coral, which provides sustenance and livelihoods to a billion people, is threatened.
Through an innovative experiment, Stanford researchers led by biology Professor Steve Palumbi have shown that some corals can – on the fly – adjust their internal functions to tolerate hot water 50 times faster than they would adapt through evolutionary change alone. The findings, published April 24 in Science, open a new realm of possibility for understanding and conserving corals.
“The temperature of coral reefs is variable, so it stands to reason that corals should have some capacity to respond to different heat levels,” said Palumbi, director of Stanford’s Hopkins Marine Station and a senior fellow at the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment. “Our study shows they can, and it may help them in the future as the ocean warms.”
Coral reefs are crucial sources of fisheries, aquaculture and storm protection. Overfishing and pollution, along with heat and increased acidity brought on by climate change, have wiped out half of the world’s reef-building corals during the past 20 years. Even atemporary rise in temperature of a few degrees can kill corals across miles of reef.
American Samoa presents a unique case study in how corals might survive a world reshaped by climate change. Water temperatures in some shallow reefs there can reach 95 degrees Fahrenheit, enough to kill most corals. To find out how native corals survive the heat, researchers in Palumbi’s lab transplanted colonies from a warm pool to a nearby cool pool and vice versa.
The researchers found that, over time, cool-pool corals transplanted to the hot pool became more heat-tolerant. Although these corals were only about half as heat-tolerant as corals that had been living in the hot pool all along, they quickly achieved the same heat tolerance that could be expected from evolution over many generations. Corals, like people, have adaptive genes that can be turned on or off when external conditions change. The corals Palumbi’s group studied adjusted themselves by switching on or off certain genes, depending on the local temperature.
These findings make clear that some corals can stave off the effects of ocean warming through a double-decker combination of adaptation based on genetic makeup and physiological adjustment to local conditions.
“These results tell us that both nature and nurture play a role in deciding how heat-tolerant a coral colony is,” Palumbi said. “Nurture, the effect of environment, can change heat tolerance much more quickly – within the lifetime of one coral rather than over many generations.”
Palumbi cautioned that corals’ heat-adaptive characteristics do not provide a magic bullet to combat climate change. They can’t respond to indefinite temperature increases and they could be compromised by stressors such as acidification and pollution.
Still, if it holds true for most corals, this adaptive ability could provide a “cushion” for survival and might give coral reefs a few extra decades of fighting back the harsh effects of climate change, Palumbi said.
The Stanford Woods Institute has supported Steve Palumbi’s study of climate change impacts on coral reefs through its Environmental Venture Projects seed grant program. Read more about Palumbi’s research.
For more Stanford experts on the biosciences and other topics, visit Stanford Experts.
-30-
These corals are not only high and dry….they are way over 86 degrees
…and if it rains, they are in fresh water
http://media-1.web.britannica.com/eb-media/00/65300-004-C334446B.jpg
Peter Burmer says:
April 25, 2014 at 11:10 am
Glad to see that WUWT is acknowledging the heating of oceans. There are lots of good measurements about it, check out:
==================================================
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/01/ocean-heat-content-variations-satellites-vs-oceanographers/
http://judithcurry.com/2014/01/21/ocean-heat-content-uncertainties/
To Peter Burmer:
You need to remember that the total ocean heat anomaly change for 10^22
Joules is of the order of 0.01 degree centigrade! Your chart fails to be relevant
on the scale important to the corals of the post title, which is several degrees
centigrade.
climateace <—[heh] says:
In relation to coral reefs, what do we know?
(1) We know that coral reefs are under significant anthropogenic stress already…
Thank you for that evidence-free assertion. You may sit back down now.
dbstealey
‘climateace <—[heh] says:
In relation to coral reefs, what do we know?
(1) We know that coral reefs are under significant anthropogenic stress already…
Thank you for that evidence-free assertion. You may sit back down now.'
Why the rude, patronising comments? My post was straight down the line.
There is not a single marine scientist in the world who would back a claim that coral reefs are not unders significant anthropogenic stress. Many of the stressors are well-documented. Some are contentious. Some are completely unarguable – except by reflexive patronising rope-a-dopes.
REPLY: Your reputation precedes you, not only as a fake named person, but by examples of the hostility you vent towards others in this blog in previous comments you’ve made. Tough noogies if you are upset, in fact feel free to be as upset as you wish. – Anthony
‘Chris R. says:
April 25, 2014 at 2:01 pm
To Peter Burmer:
You need to remember that the total ocean heat anomaly change for 10^22
Joules is of the order of 0.01 degree centigrade! Your chart fails to be relevant
on the scale important to the corals of the post title, which is several degrees
centigrade.’
You need to remember that:
(a) The additional heat is not evenly distributed
(b) That it is not necessarily average heat but occasional attainment of heat thresholds that are likely to have a significant biodiversity impact
(c) That additional heat operating on healthy reefs is very likely to be different from additional heat impacting on unhealthy reefs.
(d) That, along with changes in heat regimes, there are concomitant changes in CO2 related ocean chemistry. These may, or may not have synergistic impacts.
We don’t actually know the answers. We are conducting an experiment to find out.
REPLY: and who are “we”? – Anthony
‘Weather Dave says:
April 25, 2014 at 12:11 pm
…
Corals are a lot more robust than many would imagine. Not good news for alarmists.’
What people ‘imagine’ is a difficult scientific benchmark.
‘Don’t recall anyone blaming agriculture as a reason for this, wonder why.’
There are nutrient impacts. In addition, many Queensland coastal sub soils are highly acidic. When the soils are disturbed there are, from time-to-time, poor quality run-off as consequence.
The stresses of agricultural run-off on coral reefs are well known and generally well-accepted. There has been significant government investment in supporting altered farming practices to limit, in particular, nutrient releases.
‘REPLY: and who are “we”? – Anthony’
Fair question.
My view is that marine scientists do not know what, if any, synergies there will be between the existing suite of anthropogenic stressors on coral reefs, changes in sea level, additional heat, changes to ocean fluid dynamics, – in particular shore dynamics – and changes to ocean chemistry.
Maybe it will turn out all right in the end?
REPLY: playing dodge I see. Lame – Anthony
[snip – too stupid to print – see comment by sturgishooper -mod]
climateace says:
April 25, 2014 at 8:01 pm
Do you promise never to comment here again when I provide you with the name of a single marine scientist who does not think that all coral reefs are under anthropogenic stress?
And even if they were, so what? They’ve adapted to much more extreme & rapid change in the past. Even the Looney Left SA has this:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/designer-made-coral-reefs-could-survive-climate-changes-hot-seas/
climateace says:
April 25, 2014 at 8:31 pm
One of the joys of this blog, where long have I lurked, is moderator comments, the more snide the better. Almost makes me wish I could read the comment. Almost.
My impression is that, CAGW having failed epically, Warmunistas are thrashing about like a landed fish, looking for a new man-made disaster threat, all the while their gills bubbling white. If ocean acidification doesn’t fly, then maybe coral bleaching will. But it’s just another natural phenomenon.
‘Jimbo says:
April 25, 2014 at 9:14 am
climateace,
One thing I know about the losses in the Great Barrier Reef is the alarmism centered around ‘hot’ seas. As I have shown the losses over the last 27 years have been caused (90%) bt tropical cyclones and star of thorns starfish. Only 10% from bleaching and even bleaching itself is not only a response to warm water. Other stresses can bring this on. My issues is mainly about global warming and hot water hysteria.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/04/24/some-corals-decide-they-can-deal-with-warming/#comment-1621522‘
There is an issue about how concerned we should be about the Great Barrier Reef. Hysteria is about as useful as comfortable and relaxed. IMHO we should ditch both.
The good news is that they have developed a very effective injection to kill crown of thorns starfish. The real issue is that no-one seems to know what ecological or physical perturbations have resulted in this particular plague or whether changes to ocean heat and chemical regimes will promote larger and more persistent starfish plagues – just another large experiment.
IMHO, the focus on bleaching is interesting and useful, but corals will respond to sub-bleaching thresholds as well as to changing chemistry. Whether they are calcite or aragonite fixers is an important consideration, for example.
‘sturgishooper says:
April 25, 2014 at 8:32 pm
climateace says:
April 25, 2014 at 8:01 pm
Do you promise never to comment here again when I provide you with the name of a single marine scientist who does not think that all coral reefs are under anthropogenic stress?
And even if they were, so what? They’ve adapted to much more extreme & rapid change in the past. Even the Looney Left SA has this:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/designer-made-coral-reefs-could-survive-climate-changes-hot-seas/‘
I am not sure whether you are saying that they are not or whether you are saying that they are and that they will certainly survive the existing suite of anthropogenic stressors as well as the ones we are adding in terms of heat, chemicals and sea levels.
As I have said several times, it is up to each individual to make a decision about he or she values coral reefs. Some people value them. Others do not.
If people do value coral reefs, and the science is that they are already under various forms of anthorpogenic stress, the existing stressors are a legitimate concern for them.
If they value reefs, consider them to be under various forms of stress, then adding heat stress, chemical stress and sea-level stress are legitimate causes for additional concern.
If I have Anthony right, he wants to know which ‘we’ scientists don’t know the synergistic impacts of combining existing anthropogenic stressors and the new stressors of heat, chemistry and sea level. My failure to name them is regarded as ‘dodging’.
Well, the problem with Anthony’s expectation is that that would be all of them. My view is that no-one knows. But perhaps Anthony can point out some scientists who do know about the impact of any synergies?
‘ sturgishooper says:
April 25, 2014 at 8:39 pm
climateace says:
April 25, 2014 at 8:31 pm
One of the joys of this blog, where long have I lurked, is moderator comments, the more snide the better. Almost makes me wish I could read the comment. Almost.’
Quite.
Still, back to the central issue: how much do we really know about the synergistic impacts of anthropogenic stressors and the additional stressors of heat, chemical change and sea-level rise.
You appear to be very confident that the scientific answer is (a) well known and (b) that we can all relax.
climateace says:
April 25, 2014 at 8:50 pm
I’m saying what I said. When I show you a marine scientist who isn’t alarmed by supposed threats to corals from man-made “stresses”, do you promise to quit commenting here forever?
Can you back up your claim about not a single one, or not?
As for my opinion, corals are not now under any more threats than they have been in prior warm periods during the past unusually cool three million years. They or their ancestors not only survived much warmer seas, but thrived in them. That’s an obvious fact, since we’re now in a cold epoch & corals have been around for hundreds of millions of years, for almost all of which the oceans have been warmer than now, indeed a lot of the time down right hot.
Speaking of when the oceans were really hot, check out coral diversity during the Cretaceous Period, when thermal expansion drove the seas onto the continents, crocodiles prowled the Arctic & the world was without ice sheets:
http://coral.aims.gov.au/info/evolution.jsp
climateace says:
April 25, 2014 at 9:03 pm
It is well known that corals have adapted to much more extreme conditions in the past. Now evidence is piling up that they are in fact easily adapting to whatever mild changes might be happening today. So, yeah, no worries, mate.
The coral lifecycle is very dynamic and has developed a strong adaptation to changing sea level and living conditions.
The larval stage of corals is planktonic for a period of about 1-2 weeks. When the larval stage is released from the coral, it is dispersed over a large area by floating around in the water column. At the end of this cycle, the larval stage attaches to the substrate. If conditions are good, the coral will grow and ultimately produce a colony. If condition are not good, the new coral will die. It is the early coral lifecycle which dispersed over large areas, will thrive under favorable conditions and not so much under unfavorable conditions. Therefore by floating around early on the larval stage is constantly able to establish a foothold under ideal conditions. If sea level rises, then the coral will establish themselves closer to shore or higher up in the water column. If sea level drops, new growth will establish itself further down in the water column. This dynamic lifecycle strategy allows corals to seek out ideal living conditions through time.
John Reistroffer says:
April 26, 2014 at 1:12 pm
Also helps explain why bleaching isn’t catastrophic. Corals do it periodically naturally.
Just more alarmist scare tactics.