| Literature DB >> 31737270 |
Abstract
Ocean acidification (OA), from seawater uptake of anthropogenic CO2, has a suite of negative effects on the ability of marine invertebrates to produce and maintain their skeletons. Increased organism pCO2 causes hypercapnia, an energetically costly physiological stress. OA alters seawater carbonate chemistry, limiting the carbonate available to form the calcium carbonate (CaCO3) minerals used to build skeletons. The reduced saturation state of CaCO3 also causes corrosion of CaCO3 structures. Global change is also accelerating coastal acidification driven by land-run off (e.g. acid soil leachates, tannic acid). Building and maintaining marine biomaterials in the face of changing climate will depend on the balance between calcification and dissolution. Overall, in response to environmental acidification, many calcifiers produce less biomineral and so have smaller body size. Studies of skeleton development in echinoderms and molluscs across life stages show the stunting effect of OA. For corals, linear extension may be maintained, but at the expense of less dense biomineral. Conventional metrics used to quantify growth and calcification need to be augmented by characterisation of the changes to biomineral structure and mechanical integrity caused by environmental acidification. Scanning electron microscopy and microcomputed tomography of corals, tube worms and sea urchins exposed to experimental (laboratory) and natural (vents, coastal run off) acidification show a less dense biomineral with greater porosity and a larger void space. For bivalves, CaCO3 crystal deposition is more chaotic in response to both ocean and coastal acidification. Biomechanics tests reveal that these changes result in weaker, more fragile skeletons, compromising their vital protective roles. Vulnerabilities differ among taxa and depend on acidification level. Climate warming has the potential to ameliorate some of the negative effects of acidification but may also make matters worse. The integrative morphology-ecomechanics approach is key to understanding how marine biominerals will perform in the face of changing climate.Entities:
Keywords: Climate change; corals; marine biominerals; molluscs; sea urchins; serpulid worms
Year: 2019 PMID: 31737270 PMCID: PMC6846232 DOI: 10.1093/conphys/coz062
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Conserv Physiol ISSN: 2051-1434 Impact factor: 3.079
Figure 1Equations for the mechanisms of acidification from CO2-OA and other forms of environmental acidification for example from acid sulphate soil leachates. Modified from Fitzer ).
Studies that have investigated the impacts of environmental acidification on the microstrucure and/or mechanics of marine invertebrate skeletons and methods used. pH levels are listed as published on the total (pHT) or NBS (pHNBS) scales or no scale (pH*) if not indicated
| Phylum/ | Time | pH or Ω levels/location | Morph | Morph results | Biomechanics methods | Biomechanics results | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||
|
| Resident | pHT 7.7, 7.9, 8.1; | μCT, SEM | pHT 7.7, 21-31% ↑ in porosity & 7% ↓ in bulk density | Nanoindentation | pHT 7.7, hardness - no effect of pH; |
|
|
| 8 d to juvenile** | Ω Ar 0.22-3.71; Lab | SEM | Ω Ar ≤ 1; change in crystal size, shape & orientation, thin septa | - | - |
|
|
| Resident | Ω Ar < 1-3.71; Coast | μCT | Ar < 2; ↓ density | - | - |
|
|
| 12 mo | pHT 7.2, 7.4, 7.8, 8.0; | μCT | pHT 7.2-7.4, ↑ in porosity & ↓ in bulk density, thinner skeleton, | - | - |
|
|
| 14 mo | pH NBS 7.3, 7.6, 8.2; | SEM, EBSD | pH NBS 7.3, 7.6, | - | - |
|
|
| |||||||
|
| 335 d | pH* 7.35-8.15 | SEM | pH* 7.35-7.6, ↑ pore size; ↑ thickness primary layer; ↓ thickness secondary layer, more organic rich shell | - | - |
|
|
| |||||||
|
| 9-18 d** | pHNBS 7.4, 7.6, 7.8,7.9, 8.0; | μCT, SEM | pHNBS 7.4-7.8, ↑ porosity, irregular layers, surface pitting & erosion, thinner; change in mineral layers & crystallography | Nanoindentation, crushing test | pHNBS 7.4-7.8, ↓ hardness, elasticity & 62% ↓ in crushing force |
|
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
|
| 4 mo | pHNBS 7.8, 8.1; | - | - | Vickers hardness, Elastic modulus | pHNBS 7.8, ↑ shell hardness, ↑ stiffness |
|
|
| 4 mo | pHNBS 7.86, 8.0; | - | - | Vickers hardness, Elastic modulus | No effect of pH |
|
|
| 95 d | pHNBS | - | No effect of pH | Crushing test | pHNBS 7.7, ↓ shell strength by 28% |
|
|
| 4 mo | pHNBS 7.9, 8.1; | - | - | Vickers hardness, Elastic modulus | No effect of pH |
|
|
| Resident | pHT 7.8, 8.1; | μCT | pHT 7.8, Two-fold ↓ in density and thickness | - | - |
|
|
| 3 mo | pHNBS 7.6, 8.1, Lab | μCT | pHNBS 7.6, 0.8-8% ↓ in density depending on shell region | - | - |
|
|
| 5 mo | pHNBS 7.8, 8.0; Lab | - | - | Crushing test | pHNBS 7.8, Large snails, ↓ in crushing force, Small snails, no effect of pH |
|
|
| 3 mo | pHNBS 7.6, 8.1, Lab | μCT | pHNBS 7.6, 38-51% ↓ in density depending on shell region | - | - |
|
|
| 4 mo | pHNBS 7.8, 8.1; | - | - | Vickers hardness, Elastic modulus | No effect of pH |
|
|
| 14 mo | pHT 7.8, 7.9, 8.0; | μCT, | pHT 7.8, 20-30% ↓ in density; surface erosion, lack of layering in shell, younger shells tinner, older shells thicker | - | - |
|
|
| 6 mo. | pHT ~ 7.6, 8.1; | - | - | Crushing test | 10% reduction in strength |
|
|
| 4 mo | pHNBS 7.9, 8.1; | - | - | Vickers hardness, Elastic modulus | No effect of pH |
|
|
| Resident | pHNBS 7.52-8.2 | - | Vent site – corrosion and cracks in shell | Crushing test | Weaker shells |
|
|
| 65 d | pHNBS 7.7, 7.9, 8.1; | - | pHNBS 7.7, ↓ shell thickness | Crushing test | No effect of pH |
|
|
| 6 mo. | pHT 7.4-8.1; | - | - | Crushing test | 50% reduction in strength |
|
|
| 4 mo | pHNBS 7.9, 8.1; | - | - | Vickers hardness, Elastic modulus | No effect of pH |
|
|
| 4 mo | pHNBS 7.86, 8.0; | - | - | Vickers hardness, Elastic modulus | No effect of pH |
|
|
| |||||||
|
| 1 mo | pHT 7.6, 8.1; | SEM | No effect on crystals | Nanoindentation | No effect of pH |
|
|
| 3 mo | pHNBS7.7, 7.9, 8.0 | SEM | No effect on shape or size of crystals | - | - |
|
|
| 2 mo | pHNBS, 6.4 | SEM | pHNBS 6.4, 6.7 ↓ net calcification, no change in dissolution | Nanoindentation | No effect of pH |
|
|
| 20 wk (juveniles) | pHNBS 7.5, | FTIR | pHNBS 7.5 40% ↓ in shell mass in juveniles | Microindentation, fracture toughness | pHNBS 7.5 ↓ calcite hardness and fracture toughness in juveniles |
|
|
| 11 wk | pHNBS | SEM | No difference in shell body mass | Microindentation, fracture toughness | pHNBS 7.9/8.1 ↓ hardness and fracture resistance at salinity |
|
|
| 35 d early juveniles | pHNBS 7.8, 8.1, Lab | SEM, EBSD | pHNBS 7.8 ↑ porosity of microstructure, ↓ density | Nanoindentation | pHNBS 7.8 ↓ hardness and stiffness |
|
|
| 6 wk | pHNBS, 7.7, 8.1, Lab | - | - | Crushing test | pHNBS 7.7 ↓ crushing force |
|
|
| 8 d larva** | pHNBS 7.8, 8.0, 8.1, Lab | SEM | pHNBS 7.8 15% thinner | Crushing test | pHNBS 7.8 15-20% weaker pHNBS 8.0 13-15% weaker |
|
|
| 6 mo | pHNBS7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, 7.7, 8.1, 8.2, Lab | SEM, EBSD | pHNBS 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5. 7.7 disorganised crystals & altered layer structure | - | - |
|
|
| 6 mo | pHNBS7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, 7.7, 8.1, 8.2, Lab | SEM, EBSD | pHNBS7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, thinner calcite layer and altered layer structure and crystallography | - | - |
|
|
| 6 mo | pHT 7.65, 8.0; Lab | - | - | Crushing test | pHT 7.65 ↓ flex before failure; Strength not affected |
|
|
| 6 mo | pHNBS7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, 7.7, 8.1, 8.2, Lab | - | - | Microindentation fracture toughness, nanoindentation | pHNBS7.4, 7.5,7.7 ↑ calcite hardness and ↓ fracture toughness |
|
|
| 2 mo | pHNBS 7.8, 8.1, Lab | SEM | Disordered crystals | Crushing test | pHNBS 7.8, ↓ crushing strength 22-24% |
|
|
| 6 mo | pHNBS 7.4, 8.1, Lab | SEM-EBSD, XPEEM | pHNBS 7.2, altered crystallography structure and more ACC. | - | - |
|
|
| 9 months | pHNBS 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, | Shell shape analysis, shell thickness index (STI) | pHNBS 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, 7.7, ↓ shell thickness and rounder flatter shells. | - | - |
|
|
| 7 weeks | pHNBS7.2, 7.4, | SEM | pHNBS7.2, corrosion of internal aragonite layers | - | - |
|
|
| 6 mo | pHT 7.65, 8.0; Lab | - | - | Crushing test | pHT 7.65 ↓ flex before failure; Strength not affected |
|
|
| 68 d | pHT 7.25, 8.07; Vent transplant | SEM, EBSD | pHT 7.25, thinner shell, disturbed less ordered structure | - | - |
|
|
| 21 d - 5 mo | pHT 6.8, 7.2, 7.8, Vent transplant to lab | SEM | Calcification continued in vents; | - | - |
|
|
| 28 d | pHNBS7.6, 7.8, | SEM | Shell dissolution | Crushing test | pHNBS 7.6, 25.9% and 26.8% weaker shells | Welladsen |
|
| 2 yr | pHNBS 7.7, 8.1 | SEM-EBSD | pH 7.7, disordered crystallographic structure | - | - |
|
|
| N/A | pHNBS 6.6, 6.8, 6.9, 7.8, 7.9 | - | - | Crushing test | pH pHNBS 6.6, 6.8, 6.9, Weaker shells |
|
|
| |||||||
|
| N/A | pHT 7.35,7.55,7.8,8.0, Lab | SEM, EBSD | Shell only | - | - |
|
|
| |||||||
|
| 100 d, juveniles | pHT 7.6, 8.0, Lab | SEM | pHT 7.6, Test plates thinner, spines, dissolution/etching | Crushing test (whole urchin dried) | pHT 7.6, ↓ crushing force |
|
|
| 343 d | pHNBS 7.7, 8.1, Lab | SEM | Test plates and sines, no dissolution | - | - |
|
|
| 13 mo | pHT 7.65, 8.1, Lab | - | - | Ambital and apical plate fracture force and elasticity | No effect of pH |
|
|
| 2 wk, early juveniles | pHNBS7.4, 7.6, 7.8, 8.1, Lab | SEM | pHNBS 7.4, Spines, ↑ pore size and dissolution | - | - |
|
|
| 9 mo | pHNBS 7.6, 8.1, Lab | SEM | pHNBS 7.6, ↑ pore size apical but not ambital plates | Nanoindentation, elasticity | pHNBS 7.6, ↓ hardness and elasticity | Johnson and Byrne (unpublished data) |
|
| 3 mo, early juveniles | pHNBS 7.8, 8.0, 8.1, Lab | SEM | pHNBS 7.4, Spines, dissolution and malformation | - | - |
|
|
| 59 d | pH* 7.47, 7.7, 7.9, Lab | SEM | pH* 7.47, Spines, reduced barbs | Snap test | pH* 7.47, ↓ snap force | Emerson |
|
| 1 mo | pHT 7.7, 7.8, 8.0, 8.1, Lab | SEM | pHT 7.7, larger pore size in tooth, no change test plate thickness; no spines dissolution/etching | Crushing test | pHT 7.7, ↓ crushing force; |
|
|
| 12 mo | pHNBS 7.8, 7.9, 8.0, 8.1, Lab | - | - | Crushing tests, ambital and apical plate fracture force, nanoindentation, elasticity | No effect of pH |
|
|
| Resident | pHNBS 7.8, 8.2, Vent | - | - | Crushing force, ambital and apical plate fracture force, nanoindentation, elasticity | No effect of pH |
|
|
| 100 d, juveniles | pHT 7.6, 8.0, Lab | SEM | pHT 7.6, Test plates thinner, Spines, no dissolution/etching | Crushing test | pHT 7.6, ↓ crushing force |
|
|
| 146 d juvenile to adult | pHNBS 7.6, 7.8, 8.1 Lab | SEM | pHNBS 7.6, thinner test, spines no dissolution/etching | Crushing test | pHNBS 7.6, ↓ crushing force, rupture at sutures not skeleton |
|
|
| 5 wk | pHT 7.4, 7.7, 8.1, Lab | SEM | pHT 7.4, 7.7, spine etching | Fracture force spines, two-point bending, elasticity | pHT 7.4, 7.7, spine more brittle, ↓ fracture force, 35% and 16%, no effect of pH on elasticity |
|
|
| 45 d | pHNBS 7.2, 7.7, 8.0, Lab | SEM | pHNBS ~ 7.2, test plates pitted; spine dissolution | Fracture force spines | pHNBS ~ 7.2, spines, ↓ fracture force; No effect of pH on test plates |
|
|
| |||||||
|
| 86 d-20 wk | pHNBS 7.4, 8.2; Lab | - | - | Penetrometry, breaking test | pHNBS 7.4, ↓ force to penetrate shells |
|
|
| 86d-20 wk | pHT 7.3-7.9 Lab | SEM | Low pH increasing corrosion | Crushing test | No effect of pH | Panch |
Morphology methods: EBSD, electron back scatter defractometry; FTIR, Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy; μCT, micro-computed tomography; SEM, scanning electron microscopy; XPEEM, photo emission electron microscopy. Biomechanics methods: crushing tests (force of rupture); nanoindentation (hardness; Young’s modulus of elasticity—a measure of stiffness). ACC, amorphous calcium carbonate; ASW, artificial seawater; Coast, ***coastal runoff pH gradient; Lab, laboratory; Morph, morphology; Ω, saturation state calcium carbonate minerals; Time, exposure duration; Vent, CO2 seep pH gradient; −, not investigated; **, larva to juvenile studies, all others are of adults; ***, includes pH flux
Figure 2A schematic representation of the use of SEM-EBSD as an analytical tool to assess the effects of acidification on shell microstructure. (A) M. edulis has been a focal study species to understand the impacts of OA on marine biomineral. (B) Section imaged using SEM is a cross section through a shell grown under OA (pHNBS 7.5). (C) The same section imaged using EBSD and analysed for crystallographic orientation displayed as a crystallographic orientation map. (D) Calcite and (E) aragonite crystals at higher magnification from the same cross section of the M. edulis shell. (F) Disordered microstructure of the calcite layer and (G) dissolution of the aragonite tablets (edges more rounded compared to panel E and tablets are less tightly packed) of the shells grown in OA. Images adapted from Fitzer ).
Figure 3Crystallographic orientation maps with accompanying pole figures for the calcite and aragonite shell of M. edulis (A, D), and the calcite shells of Magallana angulata (B, E) and Saccostrea glomerata (C, F) grown at pH 8.1NBS and pHNBS 7.5 under CO2 acidfication and sulphate soil acidification. The figures highlight the similarly altered crystallographic orientation of the mussel and oyster shells with increased disorder at pH 7.5. This is highlighted by the increased range of crystallographic orientation shown by the increased variation of colours. The colours here represent a change in the angle of crystallographic orientation as per the calcite (0001) (G) and aragonite (001) (H) colour keys. Scale bars represent 5 μm for M. edulis, 45 μm for M. angulata and 200 μm for S. glomerata. Adapted from Fitzer , 2018) and Meng ).
Figure 4SEM of the surface of the apical test plates of the adult sea urchin, Heliocidaris erythrogramma maintained in control (pHNBS 8.1) (A) and decreased pH (pHNBS 7.6) (B) for 9 months. The skeleton formed in the OA treatment has thinner calcite. Images courtesy of Ms R. Johnson.
Figure 5SEM of juvenile Heliocidaris erythrogramma reared in four pH and three temperature levels in all combinations for 14 days. Urchins had shorter spines and smaller tests at pHNBS 7.4 (see Wolfe et al. 2013b). At control pH (A, E) the arrows point to the terminal spike which is the calcite growing region of the spines compared with the flat-ended spines of juveniles reared in pHNBS 7.4 indicating retarded or no calcification. Images courtesy of Dr K Wolfe.
Figure 6SEM of the spines of juvenile Heliocidaris erythrogramma reared in four pH and three temperature levels in all combinations for 14 days. The arrows point to the pointed end of the spines in control pHNBS 8.1 (A, E) at the calcite growing region. At pHNBS 7.4 and at warmer temperature the spines were shorter, more porous, had blunt ends (D) and were eroded (H) (see Wolfe et al. 2013b). Images courtesy of Dr K Wolfe.
Figure 7Tripneustes gratilla reared in three pH and three temperature levels in all combinations from the early juvenile (5.0 mm test diameter) for 146 days. A +3°C warming mitigated the negative effects of low pHNBS (pH 7.6, 7.8), but further warming was deleterious. From Dworjanyn and Byrne (2018).