the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Phytoplankton Response to Increased Nickel in the Context of Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement
Xiaoke Xin
Giulia Faucher
Ulf Riebesell
Abstract. Ocean alkalinity enhancement (OAE) is considered one of the most promising approaches to actively remove carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere by accelerating the natural process of rock weathering. This approach involves introducing alkaline substances sourced from natural mineral deposits such as olivine, basalt, and carbonates or obtained from industrial waste products such as steel slags, into seawater and dispersing them over coastal areas. Some of these natural and industrial substances contain trace metals, which would be released into the oceans along with the alkalinity enhancement. The trace metals could serve as micronutrients for marine organisms at low concentrations, but could potentially become toxic at high concentrations, adversely affecting marine biota. To comprehensively assess the feasibility of OAE, it is crucial to understand how the phytoplankton, which forms the base of marine food webs, responds to ocean alkalinization and associated trace metal perturbations. In this study, we investigated the toxicity of nickel on three representative phytoplankton species across a range of Ni concentrations (from 0 to 100 µmol L-1 with 12 µmol L-1 synthetic organic ligand). The results showed that the growth of the tested species was impacted differently. The low growth inhibition and high IC50 (concentration to inhibit growth rate by 50 %) revealed that both the coccolithophore Emiliania huxleyi and the dinoflagellate Amphidinium carterae were mildly impacted by the increase in Ni concentrations while the rapid response to exposure of Ni, high growth rate inhibition, and low IC50 of Thalassiosira weissflogii indicate low tolerance to Ni in this species. In conclusion, the variability in phytoplankton sensitivity to Ni suggests that for OAE applications with Ni-rich materials caution is required and critical toxic thresholds for Ni must be avoided.
- Preprint
(864 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(63 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Xiaoke Xin et al.
Status: open (until 06 Oct 2023)
-
RC1: 'Comment on bg-2023-130', Anonymous Referee #1, 19 Sep 2023
reply
Xin et al. measured the cell density of three marine phytoplankton species under different Ni concentrations to assess the influence of Ni on phytoplankton in the context of ocean alkalinity enhancement (OAE). They also measured the total dissolved Ni concentrations and calculated the free Ni concentrations in the growth media to examine the availability or toxicity of Ni. Overall, this study contributes to the current understanding of OAE-related Ni influence. The comments provided below are intended to assist the authors in refining their articles for publication.
Line 17: Please add a sentence to explain why you chose to study Ni and how it relates to OAE materials.
Line 17: As previously mentioned, Ni can act as a micronutrient at low concentrations. Please consider that dissolved Ni can have both positive and negative effects on phytoplankton growth. Change 'toxicity of nickel' to 'influence/effects of nickel'.
Line 8: Change “a range of Ni concentrations” to “9 Ni concentration gradients”.
Line 20 -24: Considering the results revealed some growth enhancement from Ni addition, the fertilization effects of Ni should be mentioned as well. Please write the specific inhibition effects and potential fertilization effects on phytoplankton, such as “XX% of growth rate inhibition” and “IC50 value was XX Ni concentrations”.
Line 22: The sentence “rapid response to exposure of Ni” is unclear.
Line 23: Add “diatom” before “Tholassiosira weissflogii”.
Line 58: The word “metal sensitivity” is a wide concept and considering only Ni was investigated in this study, I suggest changing it to “Ni sensitivity”.
Line 65: “EDTA”, please write out the full name the first time the abbreviation is mentioned.
Tabel 1. There were standard deviations in Fig.1 so please add the standard deviations in Table 1 for the measured Ni concentrations and potentially free Ni concentrations as well.
Line 111-114: Why did the NiCl2 stock solution (line 70) precipitate as nickel carbonate when its maximum solubility is 10.73 mol/L, while the stock solution was only 50 mmol/L? What caused this precipitation of NiCl2?
Fig 2,3,4: It’s hard to distinguish the cell density and growth rates in low Ni concentrations (0-5 umol/L). Please consider editing the figure to enhance the differentiation of data points in this low Ni concentration range. It appears that one data point may have been lost or obscured, possibly due to the similarity in results between the control (0 umol/L) and 0.01 umol/L conditions?
Discussion: I suggest giving each main discussion paragraph a subtitle. This will help to keep the audience engaged with the clear outlines.
Line 174: Please provide a reference for the sentence “Basic and ultrabasic rocks, which are widely recognized source minerals for OAE, would introduce high amounts of Ni into seawater during mineral dissolution”.
Line 179: (Hartmann et al., 2022) should be (Hartmann et al., 2023).
Line 185-209This paragraph draws comparisons between the responses of three different species based on the results, but it requires some further refinement:
Line 193: The influence of Ni at low concentrations (0-5 umol/L) is just as important at high concentrations since the natural Ni concentrations are around 10 nmol/L. It’s likely the added Ni from OAE will fall into the range of 0-5 umol/L, and E. huxleyi had enhanced growth rates in this range. Therefore, please discuss why E. huxleyi benefited from supplied Ni at low concentrations.
Line 195-204: If E. huxleyi and A. carterae produce more organic ligands to decrease the free Ni concentrations, we might observe a decline in free Ni levels at the end of the experiment. Conducting a significance test on the free Ni concentrations among the three species could help determine if the presence of additional ligands reduces Ni toxicity. However, variations in metal quotas among different species introduce additional uncertainty when testing this hypothesis. I recommend that the author revise this discussion.
Line 208: The discussion in this section lacks clarity. While the paragraph explains the potential detoxification mechanism in the diatom T. weissflogii, it fails to address why T. weissflogii exhibited higher sensitivity and lower tolerance to high Ni concentrations.
Line 212: The cited reference Guo et al., (2022) used different Ni concentrations (0-50 umol/L) and gradients, so please write the specific Ni concentrations compared here to avoid potentially misleading information. Change “in response to high Ni concentrations” to specific Ni concentrations.
Line 220: “…in our study led to orders of magnitude…” how many orders of magnitude?
Line 227: “… contained a low amount of Ni…” what’s the concentration of Ni used in Hutchins et al.
(2023)?Line 231: “These studies showed a range of sensitivities to Ni among different groups.” Please change the word “groups” to a more specific description, like “plankton” etc.
Line 231: “LC 50” Please explain or at least write out the full name when the abbreviation first appears.
Line 234: I suggest using the IC50 instead of the “lethal concentration” if you have the information because in this study IC50 was calculated and discussed.
Line 235: Move “(Huang et al., 2016)” after the “1.7mmol/L”.
Line 229-239: Considering the information presented in Table 2 and the potential impact of nickel addition mentioned in line 176, it is advisable for the authors to delve deeper into the discussion of a nickel threshold in the context of OAE projects.
Line244: Please add a reference for the sentence “Nowadays Ni is a highly demanded metal resource for battery manufacture”.
Line 253: Limestone is not a metal-free resource mineral (Šiler, 2018). In fact, nearly all minerals used in OAE contain metals, including elements like Ca and Mg. Please change it into a more accurate description.
Line 253-257: The use of limestone differs significantly from that of olivine. Limestone cannot be employed directly as an OAE material, making the example provided somewhat misleading. A revision of this discussion is necessary to provide clarity and context for the subsequent discussion on energy consumption.
Please review and ensure the accuracy of the reference format, including the inclusion of all necessary information for each citation. Specifically, please make sure to use subscript "2" for "CO₂," superscript "2+" for "Mg²⁺," avoid capitalizing journal titles, provide DOI numbers, and use standard abbreviations for journal names.
References:
Šiler, P.: The possibilities of analysis of limestone chemical composition, Mater. Sci. Eng., 2018.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-2023-130-RC1
Xiaoke Xin et al.
Xiaoke Xin et al.
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
276 | 79 | 12 | 367 | 17 | 8 | 8 |
- HTML: 276
- PDF: 79
- XML: 12
- Total: 367
- Supplement: 17
- BibTeX: 8
- EndNote: 8
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1