Advertisement

Implications of Increased Solar UVB for Aquatic Ecosystems

  • Raymond C. Smith
Conference paper
  • 76 Downloads
Part of the NATO ASI Series book series (volume 8)

Abstract

There is strong evidence that marine organisms in the upper layers of the sea are influenced by increased ultraviolet radiation resulting from declines in the thickness of stratospheric ozone. Early evidence supporting this hypothesis included the fact that wavelengths of potentially damaging ultraviolet radiation can penetrate to ecologically significant depths and laboratory findings that many marine organisms are extremely sensitive to this radiation. Laboratory results within the past few years have provided significantly improved estimates of the biological weighting function for damage to phytoplankton by UV radiation, and investigated possible protective and repair mechanisms in these organisms. Recent field work, making use of the Antarctic ozone hole to provide variable UVB flux on a natural phytoplankton community, has provided the first conclusive evidence for a direct ozone-related effect on an aquatic system giving further evidence of the sensitivity of marine organisms to UVB. Much recent work has been motivated by the large springtime depletion of stratospheric O 3 over the Antarctic which has also led to increased accuracy in atmospheric models necessary for the quantitative computation of UV fluence at high latitudes.

Keywords

Ultraviolet Radiation Ozone Depletion Stratospheric Ozone Euglena Gracilis Ozone Hole 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, J. G., D. W. Toohey, and W. H. Brune, Free Radicals Within the Antarctic Vortex: The Role of CFCs in Antarctic Ozone Loss, Science, 251, 39–46, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bidigare, R. R., M. E. Ondrusek, and S.-H. Kang, Measurements of photosynthesic and UVB blocker pigments during the Icecolors’90 expedition, Antarct. J. U. S., 1992. (submitted).Google Scholar
  3. Buhlmann, B., R Bossard, and U. Uehlinger, The influence of longwave ultraviolet radiation (u.V.-A) on the photosynthetic activity (14C-assimilation) of phytoplankton, J. Plankton Res., 9 (5), 935–943, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Caldwell, M. M., Solar ultraviolet radiation as an ecological factor for alpine plants, Ecol. Monogr., 38 (3), 243–268, 1968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Caldwell, M. M., L. B. Camp, C. W. Warner, and S. D. Flint, Action spectra and their key role in assessing biological consequences of solar UV-B radiation change, in Stratospheric Ozone Reduction, Solar Ultraviolet Radiation and Plant Life, edited by R. C. Worrest, and M. M. Caldwell, p. 87–111, Springer- Verlag, Berlin, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Calkins, J., and T. Thordardottir, The ecological significance of solar UV radiation on aquatic organisms, Nature, 283, 563–566, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carreto, J. I., M. O. Carignan, G. Daleo, and S. G. De Marco, Occurrence of mycosporine-like amino acids in the redtide dinoflagellate Alexandrium excavatum - UV photoprotective compounds? J. Plankton Res., 12, 909–921, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chalker, B. E., and W. C. Dunlap, UV-B and UV-A light absorbing compounds in marine organisms, in Response of Marine Phytoplanktion to Natural Variations in UV-B Flux: Proceedings of a Workshop, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, CA, April 5,1990, edited by B. G. Mitchell, O. Holm-Hansen, and I. Sobolev, p. Appendix J, Chemical manufacturers Association, Washington, D.C., 1990.Google Scholar
  9. Cullen, J. J., and M. R Lesser, Inhibition of photosynthesis by ultraviolet radiation as a function of dose and dosage rate - results for a marine diatom, Marine Biology, 111(2)9 183–190, 1991.Google Scholar
  10. Cullen, J. J., and M. R. Lewis, The kinetics of algal photoadaptation in the con-text of vertical mixing, J. Plankton Res., 10 (5), 1039–1063, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cullen, J. J., P. J. Neale, and M. P. Lesser, Biological weighting function for the inhibition of phytoplankton photosynthesis by ultraviolet radiation, Science, 258, 646–650, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Damkaer, D. M., and D. B. Dey, UV damage and photoreactivation potentials of larval shrimp, Pandalus platyceros, and adult euphausiids Thysanoessa raschii, Oecologia, 60, 169–175, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dohler, G., Effect of UV-B radiation on the marine diatoms Lauderia annidata and Thalassiosira rotula grown in different salinities, Mar. Biol., 83, 247–253, 1984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dohler, G., Effect of UV-B radiation (290-320nm) on the nitrogen metabolism of several marine diatoms, Journal Plant Physiol, 118, 391–400, 1985.Google Scholar
  15. Dunlap, W. C., B. E. Chalker, and J. K. Oliver, Bathymetric adaptations of reef- building corals at Davies Reef, Great Barrier Reef, Australia - EQ. UV-B absorbing compounds, J. Exp. Mar. Bio. Ecol., 104, 239–248, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. El-Sayed, S. Z., F. C. Stephens, R. R. Bidigare, and M. E. Ondrusek, Effect of Ultraviolet radiation on antarctic marine phytoplankton, in Antarctic Ecosystems; Ecological change & conservation, edited by K. R. Kerry, and G. Hempel, Springer Verlag, 1990.Google Scholar
  17. Green, A. E. S., G. B. Findley, Jr., K. F. Klenk, W. M. Wilson, and T. Mo, The ultraviolet dose dependence of non-melanoma skin cancer incidence, J. Photochem. Photobiol. B: Biol., 24, 353–362, 1976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Häder, D.-R, Effects of UV-B on motility and photoorientation in the cyanobacterium, Phormiduim uncinatum, Arch. Microbiol., 140, 34–39, 1984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Häder, D.-P, Effects of UV-B on motility and photobehavior in the green flagellate, Euglena gracilis, Arch. Microbiol., 141, 159–163, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Häder, D.-P, Effects of solar and artificial UV irradiation on motility and photo- taxis in the flagellate, Euglena gracilis, J. Photochem. Photobiol. Bt’Biol, 44, 651–656, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Häder, D.-P., Polarotaxis, gravitaxis and vertical phototaxis in the green flagellate, Euglena gracilis, Arch Microbiol, 147, 179–183, 1987.Google Scholar
  22. Helbling, E. W., V. Villafane, M. Ferrario, and O. Holm-Hansen, Impact of natural ultraviolet radiation on rates of photosynthesis and on specific marine phytoplankton species, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser 80, 89–100, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hirosawa, T., and S. Miyachi, Inactivation of hill reaction by long-wavelength ultraviolet radiation (UV-a) and its photoreactivation by visible light in the cyanobacterium, anacystis nidulans, Arch. Microbiol, 135, 98–102, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Holm-Hansen, O., UV radiation in Antarctic waters: effect on rates of primary production, in Response of Marine Phytoplanktion to Natural Variations in UV-B Flux: Proceedings of a Workshop, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, CA, April 5,1990, edited by B. G. Mitchell, O. Holm-Hansen, and I. Sobolev, p. Appendix G, Chemical manufacturers Association, Washington, D.C., 1990.Google Scholar
  25. Holm-Hansen, O., and E. W. Helbling, Polyethylene Bags and Solar Ultraviolet Radiation, Science, 1993. (in press).Google Scholar
  26. Jerlov, N. G., Ultraviolet radiation in the sea, Nature, 166, 111, 1950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jokiel, P. L., and R. H. York, Jr, Importance of ultraviolet radiation in photoinhibition of microalgal growth, Limnol. Oceanogr., 29 (1), 192–199, 1984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jokiel, P. L., and R. H. York Jr, Solar ultraviolet photobiology of the reef coral pocillopora damicornis and symbiotic zooxanthellae, Bull Mar Sci, 32, 301–315, 1982.Google Scholar
  29. Karentz, D., Ecological considerations of the Antarctic ozone depletion, Antarctic Science, 3 (1), 3–11, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Karentz, D., F. S. McEuen, M. C. Land, and W. C. Dunlap, Survey of mycosporine-like amino acid compounds in Antarctic marine organisms: Portential protection from ultraviolet exposure, Mar. Biol., 108, 157–166, 1991a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kaupp, S. E., and J. R. Hunter, Photorepair in larval anchovy, Engraulis mordax, J. Photochem. Photobiol. B: Biol, 33, 253–256, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lenoble, J., L’absorption du rayonnement ultraviolet par les ions présents dans la mer, Revue d’Optique, 35 (10), 526–531, 1956.Google Scholar
  33. Lewis, M. R., J. J. Cullen, and T. Piatt, Relationships between vertical mixing and photoadaptation of phytoplankton: similarity criteria, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser, 15, 141–149, 1984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lubin, D., and J. E. Frederick, Column Ozone Measurements From Palmer Station, Antarctica: Variations During the Austral Springs of 1988 and 1989, J. Geophys. Res., 95(D9), 13,883–13, 889, 1990.Google Scholar
  35. Lubin, D., and J. E. Frederick, The ultraviolet radiation environment of the Antarctic peninsula: The roles of ozone and cloud cover, J. Appl. Meteorol., 30, 478–493, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lubin, D., B. G. Mitchell, J. E. Frederick, A. D. Alberts, C. R. Booth, T. Lucas, and D. Neuschuler, A contribution toward understanding the biospherical sig-nificance of antarctic ozone depletion, J. Geophys. Res., 97 (D8), 7817–7828, 1992.Google Scholar
  37. Madronich, S., and C. Granier, Impact of recent total ozone changes on tropospheric ozone photodissociation, hydroxyl radicals, and methane trends, Geophys. Res. Lett., 19, 465–467, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mitchell, B. G., Action spectra of ultraviolet photoinhibition of antarctic phyto-plankton and a model of spectral diffuse attenuation coefficients, in Response of Marine Phytoplanktion to Natural Variations in UV-B Flux: Proceedings of a Workshop, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, CA, April 5,1990, edited by B. G. Mitchell, O. Holm-Hansen, and I. Sobolev, p. Appendix H, Chemical manufacturers Association, Washington, D.C., 1990.Google Scholar
  39. D. S. Nachtwey, and M. M. Caldwell (Eds.)., Impacts of climatic change on the bioshpere. Climatic Impact Assessment Program Monogr. 5, Part 1. Ultraviolet radiation effects. PB247 724, Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 1975. 647 pp.Google Scholar
  40. National Academy of Science and National Research Council, Stratospheric Ozone Depletion by halocarbons: Chemistry and Transport. Committte on Impacts of Straospheric Change, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1979.Google Scholar
  41. National Academy of Science and National Research Council, Causes and Effects of Stratospheric Ozone Reduction: an Update, committee on chemistry and physics of ozone depletion and the Commmitte on Biological effects of increased solar ultraviolet radiation. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1982.Google Scholar
  42. National Academy of Science and National Research Council, Causes and effects of stratospheric ozone reduction: update 1983, 254 pp., Committee on causes and effects of changes in stratospheric ozone, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1984.Google Scholar
  43. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Stratospheric ozone: The state of the science and NOAA’s current and future research, 197 pp., National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, D.C., 1987.Google Scholar
  44. Prézelin, B. B., and R. C. Smith, Response: Polyethylene Bags and Solar Ultra-violet Radiation, Science, 1993. (in press).Google Scholar
  45. Prézelin, B. B., M. Putt, and H. E. Glover, Diurnal patterns in photosynthetic capacity and depth-dependent photosynthesis-irradiance relationships in Synechococus spp. and larger phytoplankton in three water masses in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean, Mar. Biol., 91, 205–217, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Prézelin, B. B., N. P. Boucher, and R. C. Smith, Daytime kinetics of UVA and UYB inhibition of photosynthetic activity in Antarctic surface waters, Current Topics in Plant Physiology: an American Society of Plant Physiologist Series., 1992. Presented at Special Symposium: Photosynthetic Responses to the Environment; IXth International Congress on Photosynthesis, Kona, Hawaii, Aug. 24–27, 1992 (Accepted).Google Scholar
  47. Rundel, R. D., Action spectra and estimation of biologically effective uv radiation, Physiologia Plantarum, 58, 360–366, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rundel, R. D., and D. S. Nachtwey, Skin cancer and ultraviolet radiation, J. Photochem. Photobiol. B: Biol., 28, 345–356, 1978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schoeberl, M. R., and D. L. Hartmann, The dynamics of the stratospheric polar vortex and its relation to springtime ozone depletions, Science, 251, 46–52, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sivalingham, P. M., T. Ikawa, Y. Yokohama, and K. Nisizawa, Distribution of a 334 UV-absorbing substance in algae, with special regard of its possible physiological roles, Botanica Marina, 17, 23–29, 1974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Smith, R. C., Ozone, middle ultraviolet radiation and the aquatic environment, J. Photochem. Photobiol. B: Biol., 50 (4), 459–468, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Smith, R. C., and K. S. Baker, Penetration of UV-B and biologically effective doserates in natural waters, J. Photochem. Photobiol. B: Biol., 29, 311–323, 1979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Smith, R. C., and K. S. Baker, Stratospheric ozone, middle ultraviolet radiation and carbon-14 measurements of marine productivity, Science, 208 (4), 592–593, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Smith, R. C., and K. S. Baker, Optical properties of the clearest natural waters (200–800 nm), Appl. Opt., 20, 177–184, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Smith, R. C., and K. S. Baker, Stratospheric ozone, middle ultraviolet radiation and phytoplankton productivity, Oceanography, 2 (2), 4–10, 1989.Google Scholar
  56. Smith, R. C., Z. Wan, and K. S. Baker, Ozone depletion in Antarctica: modeling its effect on solar uv irradiance under clear-sky conditions, J. Geophys. Res., 97 (C5), 7383–7397, 1992a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Smith, R. C., et al., Ozone depletion: Ultraviolet radiation and phytoplankton biology in Antarctic waters, Science, 255 (5047), 952–959, 1992b.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Stamnes, K., S.-C. Tsay, W. Wiscombe, and K. Jayaweera, Numerically stable algorithm for discrete-ordinate-method radiative transfer in multiple scattering and emitting layered media, Appl. Opt., 27 (12), 2502–2509, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Stamnes, K., J. Slusser, M. Bowen, C. Booth, and T. Lucas, Biologically effective ultraviolet radiation, total ozone abundance, and cloud optical depth at McMurdo station, Antarctica September 15 1988 through april 15 1989, Geophys. Res. Let., 77 (12), 2181–2184, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Steemann Nielsen, E., On the comlication in marine productivity work due to the influence of ultraviolet light, J. Cons. Int. Explor. Mer., 29, 130–135, 1964.Google Scholar
  61. Tsay, S.-C., and K. Stamnes, Ultraviolet radiation in the Arctic: The impact of potential ozone depletions and cloud effects, J. Geophys. Res., 97 (D8), 7829–7840, 1992.Google Scholar
  62. United Nations Environment Programme, Environmental Effects Panel Report, United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi, Kenya, 1989.Google Scholar
  63. United Nations Environment Programme, Environmental Effects of ozone depletion: 1991 update, United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi, Kenya, 1991.Google Scholar
  64. Vernet, M., UV radiation in antarctic waters: response of phytoplankton pigments, in Response of Marine Phytoplanktion to Natural Variations in UV-B Flux: Proceedings of a Workshop, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, CA, April 5, 1990, edited by B. G. Mitchell, O. Holm-Hansen, and I. Sobolev, p. Appendix I, Chemical manufacturers Association, Washington, D.C., 1990.Google Scholar
  65. Voytek, M. A., Addressing the biological effects of decreased ozone on the Antarctic environment, AMBIO, 19 (2), 52–61, 1990.Google Scholar
  66. Watson, R., Ozone Trends Panel, Executive Summary. NASA, Washington, D.C., 1988.Google Scholar
  67. Worrest, R. C., Review of literature concerning the impact of UV-B radiation upon marine organisms, in The Role of Scalar Ultraviolet Radiation in Marine Ecosystems, edited by J. Calkins, p. 429–457, Plenum Press, New York, 1982.Google Scholar
  68. Worrest, R. C., Impact of solar ultraviolet-B radiation (290–320nm) upon marine microalgae, Physiol Plant., 58, 428–434, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Worrest, R. C., Impact of solar ultraviolet-B radiation (290–320nm) upon marine microalgae, Physiol Plant., 58, 428–434, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Worrest, R. C., The effect of solar UV-B radiation on aquatic systems: An overview, in Effects of Changes in Stratospheric Ozone and Global Climate, Overview, edited by J. G. Titus, p. 175–191, US Environmental Protection Agency and United Nations Environmental Program 1, 1986.Google Scholar
  71. Worrest, R. C., H. Van Dyke, and B. E. Thomson, Impact of enhanced simulated solar ultraviolet radiation upon a marine community, J. Photochem. Photobiol. B: Biol, 17, 471–478, 1978.Google Scholar
  72. Worrest, R. C., D. L. Brooker, and H. Van Dyke, Results of a primary productivity study as affected by the type of glass in the culture bottle, Limnol. Oceanogr., 25, 360–364, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Worrest, R. C., K. U. Wolniakowski, J. D. Scott, D. L. Brooks, B. E. Thomson, and H. Van Dyke, Sensitivity of marine phytoplankton to UV-B radiation: impact upon a model ecosystem, J. Photochem. Photobiol. B: Biol., 33, 223–227, 1981a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Worrest, R. C., B. E. Thomson, and H. Van Dyke, Impact of UV-B radiation upon estuarine microcosms, J. Photochem. Photobiol. B: Biol., 33, 861–867, 1981b.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Yentsch, C. S., and C. M. Yentsch, The attenuation of light by marine phytoplankton with specific reference to the absorption of near-UV radiation, in The Role of Scalar Ultraviolet Radiation in Marine Ecosystems, edited by J. Calkins, p. 691–700, Plenum Press, New York, 1982.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raymond C. Smith
    • 1
  1. 1.CSL/CRSEOUniversity of California, Santa BarbaraSanta BarbaraUSA

Personalised recommendations