Global warming amplified by reduced sulphur fluxes as a result of ocean acidification (original) (raw)

References

  1. Gattuso, J-P. & Hansson, L. in Ocean Acidification (eds Gattuso, J-P. & Hansson, L.) 1–20 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2011).
    Google Scholar
  2. Turley, C. The Other C _O_2 Problem (openDemocracy, 2005); available at: http://www.acamedia.info/sciences/sciliterature/globalw/reference/carolturley.html.
  3. Doney, S. C., Fabry, V. J., Feely, R. A. & Kleypas, J. A. Ocean acidification: The other CO2 problem. Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 1, 169–192 (2009).
    Article Google Scholar
  4. Hopkins, F., Nightingale, P. & Liss, P. in Ocean Acidification (eds Gattuso, J-P. & Hansson, L.) 210–229 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2011).
    Google Scholar
  5. Bates, T. S., Lamb, B. K., Guenther, A., Dignon, J. & Stoiber, R. E. Sulfur emissions to the atmosphere from natural sources. J. Atmos. Chem. 14, 315–337 (1992).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  6. Levasseur, M. If Gaia could talk. Nature Geosci. 4, 351–352 (2011).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  7. Jungclaus, J. H. et al. Climate and carbon-cycle variability over the last millennium. Clim. Past 6, 723–727 (2010).
    Article Google Scholar
  8. Ilyina, T., Zeebe, R. E. & Brewer, P. G. Future ocean increasingly transparent to low-frequency sound owing to carbon dioxide emissions. Nature Geosci. 3, 18–21 (2010).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  9. Hönisch, B. et al. The geological record of ocean acidification. Science 335, 1058–1063 (2012).
    Article Google Scholar
  10. Riebesell, U., Bellerby, R. G. J., Grossart, H-P. & Thingstad, F. Mesocosm CO2 perturbation studies: From organism to community level. Biogeosciences 5, 1157–1164 (2008).
    Article Google Scholar
  11. Carslaw, K. S. et al. A review of natural aerosol interactions and feedbacks within the Earth system. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 10, 1701–1737 (2010).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  12. Charlson, R. J., Lovelock, J. E., Andreae, M. O. & Warren, S. G. Oceanic phytoplankton, atmospheric sulphur, cloud albedo and climate. Nature 326, 655–661 (1987).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  13. Maier-Reimer, E. et al. The HAMburg Ocean Carbon Cycle Model HAMOCC5.1—Technical Description (Berichte zur Erdsystemforschung, Vol. 14, Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, 2005); available at http://www.mpimet.mpg.de.
  14. Six, K. D. & Maier-Reimer, E. What controls the oceanic dimethylsulfide (DMS) cycle? A modeling approach. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 20, GB4011 (2006).
    Article Google Scholar
  15. Kloster, S. et al. DMS cycle in the marine ocean–atmosphere system—a global model study. Biogeosciences 3, 29–51 (2006).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  16. Lana, A. et al. An updated climatology of surface dimethlysulfide concentrations and emission fluxes in the global ocean. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 25, GB1004 (2011).
    Article Google Scholar
  17. Stier, P. et al. The aerosol-climate model ECHAM5-HAM. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 5, 1125–1156 (2005).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  18. Zhang, K. et al. The global aerosol-climate model ECHAM-HAM, version 2: Sensitivity to improvements in process representations. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 12, 8911–8949 (2012).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  19. Meehl, G. & Stocker, T. F. in IPCC Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis (eds Solomon, S. et al.) 1–18 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007).
  20. Arnold, H. E. et al. Interacting effects of ocean acidification and warming on growth and DMS-production in the haptophyte coccolithophore Emiliania huxleyi. Glob. Change Biol. 19, 1007–1016 (2013).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  21. Archer, S. D. et al. Contrasting responses of DMS and DMSP to ocean acidification in Arctic waters. Biogeosciences 10, 1893–1908 (2013).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  22. Kim, J-M. et al. Enhanced production of oceanic dimethylsulfide resulting from CO2-induced grazing activity in a high CO2 world. Environ. Sci. Technol. 44, 8140–8143 (2010).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  23. Steinacher, M. et al. Projected 21st century decrease in marine productivity: A multi-model analysis. Biogeosciences 7, 979–1005 (2011).
    Article Google Scholar
  24. Thomas, M. et al. Rate of non-linearity in DMS aerosol-cloud-climate interactions. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 11, 11175–11183 (2011).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  25. Woodhouse, M. T., Mann, G. W., Carslaw, K. S. & Boucher, O. Sensitivity of cloud condensation nuclei to regional changes in dimethyl-sulphide emissions. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 13, 2723–2733 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
  26. Moss, R. et al. The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment. Nature 463, 747–756 (2010).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  27. Gao, K. S. et al. Rising CO2 and increased light exposure synergistically reduce marine primary productivity. Nature Clim. Change 2, 519–523 (2012).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  28. Keller, M., Bellows, W. & Guillard, R. in Biogenic Sulfur in the Enviroment (eds Saltzman, E. & Cooper, W.) 167–181 (ACS-Symposium series, 1989).
    Book Google Scholar
  29. Vignati, E., Wilson, J. & Stier, P. M7: An efficient size-resolved aerosol microphysics module for large-scale aerosol transport models. J. Geophys. Res. 109, D22202 (2004).
    Article Google Scholar

Download references