Can Kelp help?

Human activities incessantly cause and aggravate major ecological problems and show no signs of stopping. While is essential to prevent these problems from occurring, some problems are too complex and widespread to completely prevent. However, we can strive to mitigate the problem. This will lessen the adverse effects of the problem on the environment, slowing down its deterioration while efforts are made to avert the problem in its entirety.

Ocean acidification is one such complex and multi-faceted ecological problem worsened by human deeds. However, there is a likely way to mitigate this problem–kelp [1]. Kelp has properties that can lessen the effects of ocean acidification on the marine community around it. However, kelp may have greater implications and potential than hitherto known. Thus, research aimed at fully understanding these far-reaching effects of kelp and then optimizing these effects to combat ocean acidification undoubtedly deserves funding.

Acknowledging the extent of ocean acidification is critical to understanding the need for this research. Atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have been increasing ever since the Industrial revolution, owing to various anthropogenic activities [4]. The ocean absorbs nearly one-fourth of this atmospheric carbon dioxide which is approximately 525 billion tons of CO2. This amounts to an incredible 22 million tons of CO2 every day [4]. On absorption, Co2 converts to carbonic acid leading to an increase in the acidity of the water. In the past 200 years alone, the acidity of the ocean has increased by 30% [4] and is estimated to be 150% more acidic by the turn of the century. Such drastic changes in oceanic chemistry spell doom for the stability of the marine environment and the organisms in it. 

So where does kelp come in? Kelp has been shown to substantially reduce the effects of ocean acidification by absorbing the CO₂ in the water along with nitrogen, carbon and phosphorus [5]. Kelp uses these as nutrients for photosynthesis and unknowingly, purifies the water. It also gives out oxygen which betters living conditions for marine organisms around the kelp bed. Owing to the chain of events ocean acidification starts, the sole property of kelp to reduce the impacts of ocean acidification is substantially important.

Research on the far-reaching effects of kelp has several practical avenues to follow especially because it affects several levels in an eco-system. There are two examples I would like to highlight to give you a brief glimpse of the extent to which ocean acidification affects organisms. This will also bring out the why we must look into whether kelp can help mitigate these effects and to what extent can it do so.

Firstly, acidification reduces carbonate ions in the ocean, which is an important component of the shells of the pteropod among other marine organisms [2]. It partially dissolves the animal’s shell and reduces its ability to escape predators and infection [2]. It is estimated that by 2050, three-quarters of the pteropod populations will be affected [3]. Pteropods form a primary source of food for several marine organisms including salmon. Researchers say that a 10% decrease in pteropod population could result in a 20% drop in the body weight of mature salmon. Salmon in turn is eaten by orcas, seals, sea lions and even humans [3]. The exact effects on the consumers of salmon have not been determined, but it could be a potential direction of research. In this way, ocean acidification begins a domino effect that starts with pteropods and resonates throughout the food chain. How would have these events played out if we knew kelp could play a role in lessening the effects of ocean acidification? And what if we knew how to optimize kelp’s role?

Secondly, researchers found that high levels of carbon dioxide concentration interfere with the functions of GABA, a neurotransmitter which largely controls the central nervous system of fishes.  This is detrimental to a fish’s sense of sight, direction and smell. As fishes use their sense of smell to navigate their way through the reefs and around predators, CO₂ exposed fish are more vulnerable. In fact, the death rates for exposed fish were five times that of non-exposed fish. [6] A separate study showed that CO₂ also leads to diminutive cognitive function in pollocks. It affects their abilities to detect food sources causing reduced life spans and greater death rates. The pollock fishery industry in Northwest and West coast reels in three billion pounds of fish out of which seafood companies stand to make an incredible amount of one billion dollars annually. Dropping pollock populations significantly upset this industry and the people associated with it. Interestingly, these very fish are also used in the McDonald’s Filet-O-Fish. Thus, there are intricate connections between ocean acidification, fish cognition and the fish industry (and by extension, McDonald’s too). [6] The question arises again, what if we knew kelp could play a role in lessening the effects of OA? Kelp restoration beds and kelp planting are several ways kelp can be introduced to a marine eco-system where it could play a role. What if we knew how to optimize this role?

These two examples illustrate the effects of ocean acidification and the potential avenues for research in terms of how and where kelp can help. Knowing that kelp is a potential solution in mitigating ocean acidification, optimization of kelp’s usage is important to know too. This creates several questions for research to answer. For instance, what marine farming pattern should be considered while growing kelp? Where should the kelp be planted or how much should be grown per hectare to ensure maximum impact? Are there other seaweeds that can boost kelp production? There is, indeed, much to know and much to find.

In conclusion, I would just like to summarize why this research area must receive funding. Ocean acidification is a prevalent and widespread problem. The marine environment affected by it is in dire need of help. Kelp has shown promising potential to mitigate the effects of ocean acidification. Research done on this topic will yield results that can be implemented easily and immediately. Also, these results can show how to optimize kelp usage to have the greatest possible impact on the environment and the numerous affected marine organisms. Simply put, due to the need, potential and practicality of the results of this research I believe that it is a research area worth funding.

References:

1.      Roleda, Michael Y., and Catriona L. Hurd. “Seaweed Responses to Ocean Acidification.” Seaweed Biology (2012): 407–431. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-28451-9_19.

2.      Busch, D. Shallin, Michael Maher, Patricia Thibodeau, and Paul McElhany. “Shell Condition and Survival of Puget Sound Pteropods Are Impaired by Ocean Acidification Conditions.” Edited by Gretchen E. Hofmann. PLoS ONE 9, no. 8 (August 27, 2014): e105884. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0105884.

3.      Lynne Peeples. Seaweed Might Have The Power To Make The Oceans Less Acidic. Huffington Post Green. Posted 28^th April, 2015, Updated 27^th May, 2015. 21^st November, 2015 edition. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/28/kelp-ocean-acidification-algal-blooms_n_7152362.html

4.      Ocean Acidification–Pristine Seas–National Geographic. National Geographic. Date accessed: 22^nd November, 2015. http://ocean.nationalgeographic.com/ocean/explore/pristine-seas/critical-issues-ocean-acidification/

5.      Help from Kelp. Office of Aquaculture. NOAA Fisheries. Date published: 23^rd September, 2015. Date accessed: 22^nd November, 2015. http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/aquaculture/homepage_stories/18_help_from_kelp.html

6.      Craig Welch. Sea Change–Pacific Ocean’s Perilous Change. The Seattle Times. Date accessed: 22^nd November, 2015. http://apps.seattletimes.com/reports/sea-change/2013/sep/11/pacific-ocean-perilous-turn-overview/

Who Controls Who?

Scientists have long since been aware of the microbiota in the human gut and its influences on the human digestive system. However, the importance and extent of influence of the human microbiome in other parts of the body has only recently surfaced. It is intriguing to know that a multitude of bacteria is living in the human body affecting its physiological processes and functions. It raises the question whether humans, as hosts, control the millions of microorganisms inhabiting them or is it the other way around? Koenig et al.’s study of the developing infant gut microbiome attempts to answer this question.

In their study, the Succession of microbial consortia in the developing infant gut microbiome, over 60 fecal samples, taken over two and a half years, from a single infant were analyzed. The gut microbial composition of each sample was obtained using 454-pyrosequencing of rRNA. From this approximately 318,620 16S rRNA gene sequences were generated and plotted onto a timeline coinciding with life events such as introduction of solid food, onset of ear infection and weaning. On basis of the patterns observed on this timeline, more than 500,000 sequences from 12 samples were studied in greater detail with respect to certain life events. This metagenomic analysis formed a foundation on which further results were acquired (Koenig et al., 2010).

Major results noted specific variations in the microbiome concerning time, composition and function. For instance, diversity of bacterial communities decreased before the occurrence of a fever and after the ingestion of antibiotics. Also, succession of bacterial communities positively correlated with age and succession of life stages. Furthermore, bacterial communities occupied specific niches and some communities were never present together (Koenig et al, 2010). These two findings show the dynamic nature of our microbiome and the effect of human life stages over them. It is essential to note that in this case the change in the microbiome occurred after the life event or stage.

The last lot of results focused on the link between gene function and occurrence of life events. Meta Genome Rapid Annotation using Subsystem Technology showed that certain gene sequences were enriched according to the need of their function. For example, genes that help digest plant-based glycans were enriched before the introduction of solid food in the infant’s diet. It wasn’t just gene sequences that were being enriched; entire phyla as well became more abundant corresponding to certain life events. For example, after the onset of fever, phyla Actinobacteria and Proteobacteria had a relatively greater abundance in the gut. (Koenig et al, 2010). Thus, it is evident that the bacterial diversity depends on the function required from the microbiome.

Regarding the digestion of plant-based glycans, the microbiome changed before the life event occurred, unlike the the earlier result. This raises some rather interesting questions. Do microbiome changes trigger transitions through life stages? Without these microbial changes would an individual not proceed to the next life stage? Do microbiomes truly control human physiology? Is their control substantial?

It is certain that their control is much more than hitherto known. Several studies focus on finding out more on this curious case of microbial control on the human physiology. One such study directly linked the gut microbiota and its production of metabolites to physiological control. It concluded that gut microbiomes produced certain metabolites which can affect the production of the neurotransmitter, serotonin, and in turn affect physiological functions of the body (Ridaura, 2015). Another study established that microbial secretions consisted of mood-controlling neurochemicals such as dopamine and GABA (Smith, 2015). Another research shows that certain bacteria are predominantly found in people who suffer from depression (Smith, 2015).

All of these studies provide an insight into the workings of the human gut microbiome. The extent of its influences into the domain of human moods and emotions is indeed astonishing. However, scientists have barely touched the surface of the subject of microbial control on humans. The aforementioned studies covered only the microbiome in the human gut. Bacteria inhabit several other parts of the body giving scientists a variety of microbiomes to study. Also, the Koenig et al study analyzed just a single infant. A possible future study could be devoted to a meta-analysis of several infant gut microbiomes which could give further insights into the workings of the human microbiomes.

The findings from Koenig et al’s research and the other discussed studies have undoubtedly enhanced the ecological understanding of the human microbiome. The question of “Who controls who?” does remain unanswered. However, it has given rise to several other questions worth finding answers to.

References:

          1. Koenig JE, Spor A, Scalfone N, Fricker AD, Stombaugh J, Knight R, Angenent LT, Ley RE. Succession of microbial consortia in the developing infant gut microbiome. PNAS. June 24, 2010. http://www.pnas.org/content/108/Supplement_1/4578.full.pdf

2. Vanessa Ridaura, Yasmine Belkaid. Gut Microbiota: The link to your Second Brain. Science Direct. 9^th April, 2015; Volume161 (Issue 2).  http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092867415003530

3.  Peter Andrey Smith. Can the Bacteria in Your Gut Explain Your mood? The New York Times Magazine. June 23, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/28/magazine/can-the-bacteria-in-your-gut-explain-your-mood.html?_r=1

1.