Howard Et Al 2017 FEE
Howard Et Al 2017 FEE
Howard Et Al 2017 FEE
42
Clarifying the role of coastal and marine
systems in climate mitigation
Jennifer Howard1†*, Ariana Sutton-Grier2,3†, Dorothée Herr4, Joan Kleypas5, Emily Landis6, Elizabeth Mcleod7,
Emily Pidgeon1, and Stefanie Simpson8
The international scientific community is increasingly recognizing the role of natural systems in climate-
change mitigation. While forests have historically been the primary focus of such efforts, coastal wetlands –
particularly seagrasses, tidal marshes, and mangroves – are now considered important and effective long-
term carbon sinks. However, some members of the coastal and marine policy and management community
have been interested in expanding climate mitigation strategies to include other components within coastal
and marine systems, such as coral reefs, phytoplankton, kelp forests, and marine fauna. We analyze the
scientific evidence regarding whether these marine ecosystems and ecosystem components are viable
long-term carbon sinks and whether they can be managed for climate mitigation. Our findings could assist
decision makers and conservation practitioners in identifying which components of coastal and marine
ecosystems should be prioritized in current climate mitigation strategies and policies.
Million hectares (ha) Million Mg C yr−1 Total (million Mg C) % yr−1 Million Mg CO2
Mangroves 13.8–15.2 31.2–34.4 5617–6186 0.7–3.0 144.3–681.1
Tidal marshes 2.2–40 4.8–87.2 570–10,360 1.0–2.0 20.9–760.4
Seagrasses 17.7–60 41.4–82.8 4260–8520 0.4–2.6 62.5–813.0
†
Coral 28.4 NA Unknown 0.4–0.57 NA
Kelp >2.35 NA 11.75 NA NA
Phytoplankton 36,190* 0.5–2.4 507–23,885 NA NA
Fauna 36,190* NA Unknown NA NA
Notes: *Based on global ocean area. †Only for the Great Barrier Reef. #Assuming all carbon is converted to CO2 NA = not applicable. For a more detailed version of this
Table, including references, please see WebTable 2.
carbon removal from the surrounding water column and (Figure 2a), coral reefs are generally considered as small
atmosphere (Gattuso et al. 1998). Coral reef calcification sources of CO2 to the atmosphere (Suzuki and Kawahata
occurs when CaCO3 precipitates out of the water column 2003; Borges et al. 2005). However, with increasing ocean
onto the reef structure (Gattuso et al. 1999) and for every acidification resulting from rising atmospheric CO2
mole of CaCO3 produced, about 0.6 moles of CO2 is concentrations, the balance between calcification and
released to the atmosphere (Ware et al. 1992). As a coun- dissolution may shift (Frankignoulle et al. 1994). Under
terbalance, coral reefs undergo dissolution when the future conditions of ocean acidification, many reefs are
surrounding water becomes undersaturated with CaCO3 expected to enter a net dissolution phase (Eyre et al.
(as in the deep ocean and under future ocean acidification 2014; Shaw et al. 2015) and may become CO2 sinks but to
scenarios) – a process that involves capturing CO2 out of the detriment of the overall health of reef ecosystems.
the water column. Currently, coral calcification rates Despite their limited capacity to directly sequester
exceed dissolution rates, thereby allowing coral reef struc- carbon, at least over decadal to century timescales (Ware
tures to grow. Thus, because the CO2 released through et al. 1992; Kleypas 1997), coral reefs provide important
calcification exceeds the CO2 captured by dissolution climate adaptation benefits (eg wave buffering from
(a) (b)
Figure 2. (a) Coral reef systems can be either a CO2 source or sink. They take up carbon through photosynthesis of their symbiotic
algae and dissolution of the reef structure itself (purple arrows), and release carbon through respiration and calcification (black arrows).
Currently, they are not sequestering carbon, because despite the carbon that is integrated into the reef structure, where it can remain for
millennia, the net impact of calcification on the atmosphere is still an increase in CO2. (b) Kelp take up carbon through photosynthesis
(purple arrows) and release carbon through respiration (black arrows). The majority of kelp is consumed; in this way, some of the
carbon in kelp moves into marine fauna biomass and excrement pools. Kelp do not sequester carbon long term due to their quick
turnover rate and lack of a soil component. There is little evidence that any degraded kelp sinks to the bottom of the ocean, given that
most, if not all, is consumed before reaching the seafloor.
46 extreme storms) and support habitats with higher carbon topic is incomplete and is not being implemented at a
sequestration potential (eg mangroves, seagrasses). globally relevant scale.
Primarily occurring in nearshore temperate and polar As single-celled organisms present in the oceans’ water
regions, kelp forests contain dense stands of macroalgae column, phytoplankton provide 70% of the oxygen we
and provide food and shelter for many marine species. breathe and are a crucial source of food to marine fauna.
Although the estimated areal extent of kelp habitat is Although the amount of phytoplankton in the world’s
approximately 2.35 million ha worldwide, only a fraction oceans is uncertain, their total biomass is estimated to
of this area has been verified (Graham et al. 2007). be between 0.5–2.4 billion Mg C (Table 1 and
The carbon stored in kelp biomass ranges from 37–54 WebTable 2; Buitenhuis et al. 2013). Most phytoplankton
Mg C ha−1 (Muraoka 2004); given the estimated spatial are short lived or consumed by higher-trophic-level organ-
extent of kelp forests, its projected global carbon stock isms, giving them a rapid turnover. Thus, carbon remains
is between 87–127 million Mg C (Table 1 and stored in their biomass only for hours to weeks, unlike
WebTable 2). Often free floating or attached to rocky carbon sequestered in mangrove wood, which can last
substrates, kelp do not develop extensive rooting systems for decades. However, a small yet important fraction of
for trapping detritus and sediment such as vegetation in carbon in phytoplankton (0.1% or 0.5–2.4 million Mg
coastal wetlands and so do not have a soil carbon pool. C yr−1) will sink and become sequestered long-term in
Free floating, detached, or dead kelp is quickly consumed seafloor sediments (Figure 3a; Falkowski 2012).
by marine fauna including avian species, and the fraction The size of the world’s phytoplankton carbon pool is
of kelp-based carbon that is ultimately sequestered through considered to be relatively stable (with seasonal variations),
burial in ocean sediments is still poorly understood (Smale but changing ocean temperatures and circulation patterns
et al. 2013). The short life span of individual kelp plants may lead to shifts in phytoplankton species extent and
(~1 year) and their lack of long- term carbon storage community composition, which may alter carbon fluxes
mean that they cannot act as effective long-term carbon (Lam et al. 2011; Committee on Geoengineering Climate
sinks (Figure 2b; Spalding et al. 2003; Muraoka 2004) 2015). Despite representing a globally relevant carbon sink,
and are not considered as part of a viable climate miti- phytoplankton are not well suited for climate mitigation
gation strategy. Although harvesting kelp for human use policies because their sequestration capacity cannot be
(eg in cosmetics, paper, biofuel) could benefit climate manipulated without geoengineering (about which the
mitigation by providing more sustainable alternatives to scientific community has articulated major concerns;
using products derived from petroleum or other natural Committee on Geoengineering Climate 2015), issues of
resources (http://bit.ly/1gOLIhG), to date research on this jurisdiction on the high seas remain a challenge, and
(a) (b)
Figure 3. (a) Phytoplankton take up carbon through photosynthesis (purple arrow) and release carbon through respiration (black
arrow). The majority of phytoplankton are consumed by higher-trophic-level organisms where some of the carbon gets integrated into
marine fauna biomass and excrement pools. A small yet key percentage of phytoplankton sinks to the bottom of the ocean where it is
sequestered long term in the sediment (red dashed arrow). (b) Marine fauna. Fish and krill do not take up or sequester carbon
themselves; instead they accumulate carbon that was taken up by phytoplankton (purple arrow). The formation of CaCO3 to create
the shells of calcifiers at the surface and its dissolution as it sinks drives a surface to deepwater alkalinity gradient, which further
reduces the capacity of the ocean’s surface to absorb CO2. None of these organisms are considered to sequester carbon.
substantial scientific uncertainties prohibit accurate carbon dissolution (sink of CO2) neutralizes much of the CO2 47
accounting of sequestration by phytoplankton at this time released due to the calcification process (Woosley et al.
(for further discussion, see the penultimate section below). 2012; Barrett et al. 2014). Another aspect of carbon
excretion through fish feces is that it increases the rate
Marine fauna at which carbon sinks to the ocean floor. However,
most fish feces are rapidly consumed and the carbon
By accumulating carbon in their biomass and releasing in them is respired or excreted by bacteria during its
carbon through respiration and defecation, marine fauna – descent. This restricts the amount of carbon in feces
specifically calcifiers (eg shellfish, zooplankton, and pter- ultimately reaching the deep ocean (Denman et al.
opods), krill, and teleost fish – play a role in carbon 2007) and thereby limits the contributions of fish to
cycling (Figure 3b). These organisms are found in all long-term ocean carbon sequestration. It is also not
major marine waterbodies and populations vary by region clear if there is any additional sequestration value
and depth, though the largest known krill population resulting from fish consumption and subsequent e xcretion.
is located off Antarctica (Atkinson et al. 2008). For example, the carbon sequestered by phytoplankton
– whether as a component of dead phytoplankton, fish
Calcifiers biomass, or fish feces – would eventually sink to the
seafloor regardless of its path. While increases in fish
The shells of planktonic calcifiers can act as ballast populations, and hence fish biomass, will result in a
to increase the transport of organic carbon to the temporary increase in the fish biomass carbon pool, it
deep sea, and thereby sequester it for long periods of would not affect the long-term sequestration of carbon
time. However, the formation of CaCO3 at the surface in the deep ocean above the natural baseline (Figure 3b).
and its dissolution as it sinks drives a surface to deep- In summary, calcifiers, krill, and teleost fish are impor-
water alkalinity gradient, which reduces the capacity tant components of the carbon cycle in oceans but do not
of the surface ocean to absorb CO2 (Mathez 2013). contribute to long- term carbon sequestration.
In addition, calcifiers build their shells using the same Calcification in fecal production and shell formation is a
calcification process as corals, resulting in the same source of CO2 and because fish and krill fail to remove
net production of CO2. Therefore, based on current carbon directly from the atmosphere, they do not substan-
scientific understanding, we believe that calcifiers have tially alter the baseline of carbon ultimately sequestered
a limited impact on climate mitigation through carbon in the oceans. Management and policy actions that lead
sequestration. to changes in fish and krill populations would therefore
have negligible value in long-term climate mitigation. In
Krill addition, most populations of marine fauna reside in the
open ocean or cross international boundaries and their
Although estimated to have a mean carbon pool of members actively or passively disperse, occasionally over
35 million Mg C (Atkinson et al. 2009; Laffoley et al. vast distances, thus presenting jurisdictional challenges
2014), krill do not remove carbon from the atmosphere regarding management responsibilities and sanctions. For
themselves, and most of the carbon assimilated into all these reasons, calcifiers, krill, and teleost fish have
the krill’s biomass via consumption is in turn consumed limited potential to contribute to climate mitigation
by higher- trophic-
level predators. Krill feces are esti- efforts.
mated to contribute 0.037–56.94 Mg C yr−1 ha−1 to
the deepwater carbon flux baseline; however, the majority JJ Informed climate mitigation policy
of the carbon in feces is consumed and either respired
or excreted by bacteria and benthic organisms To achieve emissions reduction targets and inform
(Pakhomov et al. 2002; Denman et al. 2007), and so climate mitigation policies, we argue that a compre-
plays a negligible role in climate mitigation through hensive strategy is necessary, one that recognizes the
carbon sequestration. role of – and implements effective, science- driven
management practices in – natural ecosystems, including
Teleost fish coastal wetlands. Although reducing fossil- fuel-
based
GHG emissions is a direct means to this end, avoided
Rather than removing atmospheric carbon directly, emissions can be gained by protecting habitats, some
teleost (ray-
finned) fish accumulate carbon in their of which may also offer sequestration-related services.
biomass by consuming phytoplankton or other marine However, much of the relevant ecosystem-specific scien-
organisms. This carbon is later released through respi- tific data regarding carbon storage, sequestration rates,
ration and defecation (in the form of CaCO3). Fish and anthropogenic emissions is neither easily accessible
feces also have a high Mg content, which increases to decision makers nor comparable across studies and
the CaCO3 dissolution near the ocean surface. This habitats, thereby complicating informed policy discus-
balance between calcification (source of CO2) and sions. To address this issue, we briefly summarize the
48 carbon sequestration value and potential emissions from Land-Use Change and Forestry [LULUCF] sectors), and
conversion of the marine ecosystems and ecosystem related climate financing mechanisms. Based on the
components mentioned above (Table 1 and governance challenges associated with open- ocean
WebTable 2) and the criteria required for their consid- geographies and/or the current science demonstrating
eration in climate mitigation efforts (WebTable 3). that they are inconsequential stores of carbon, four
Our understanding of the carbon sequestration capacity components – corals, kelp, phytoplankton, and marine
of corals, kelp, and marine fauna suggests that they do not fauna – are ineligible to be included in current UNFCCC
represent consequential, verifiable, long- term carbon mitigation finance mechanisms and should not be prior-
sinks with respect to the atmosphere. Corals are currently itized at this time in climate mitigation efforts. Instead,
a carbon source, and marine fauna do not sequester conservation practitioners should consider other interna-
carbon directly but are simply a component of the carbon tional policy and funding opportunities (eg biodiversity
cycle. Kelp ecosystems take up carbon in the short term, conservation and climate adaptation) to support the
but without a meaningful soil component, they do not protection and restoration of these important compo-
maintain long- term sinks. The carbon sequestered by nents of coastal and marine ecosystems.
phytoplankton in deep- ocean sediments is globally
important, due to the abundance of phytoplankton, but is JJ Conclusions
inherently difficult and impractical to manage given its
pan-oceanic distribution. In addition, the only current Coastal blue carbon ecosystems (mangroves, tidal
management strategy to increase phytoplankton produc- marshes, and seagrasses) represent important climate
tivity above the baseline involves artificially increasing mitigation opportunities. These ecosystems have high
nutrients (iron, nitrogen, phosphorus) in large expanses rates of carbon sequestration, act as long-term carbon
of the ocean; however, strong concerns have been sinks, and are contained within clear national juris-
expressed regarding the impacts of such geoengineering dictions; in addition, management strategies exist to
projects on ocean ecosystems (Russell et al. 2012). integrate them into GHG accounting. By contrast,
Similarly, open- ocean ecosystems are predominantly other marine ecosystems and ecosystem components
outside national jurisdictional boundaries, hindering (ie corals, kelp, and marine fauna) do not act as
inclusion of these marine ecosystems in climate substantial and/or long-term carbon sinks. Phytoplankton
mitigation- related policies (eg Nationally Determined are a long-term carbon sink but their consideration in
Contributions under the Paris Agreement). Policy climate mitigations policies is limited due to challenges
challenges include lack of clarity regarding who would associated with ownership, management, and a lack of
(1) determine and implement management strategies, practical accounting methods. Despite limitations, these
(2) conduct assessments to support national GHG inven- marine systems play a vital role in maintaining the
tories, or (3) receive financial gains (such as carbon baseline of the carbon cycle of the ocean and provide
credits) resulting from climate mitigation activities. many other services including coastal protection, habitat,
The scientific evidence supporting the role of food security, and tourism income. Efforts to protect
mangroves, tidal marshes, and seagrasses as long-
term and manage these marine ecosystems are therefore
carbon sinks is well-established. Recognizing the p otential essential to maintaining these benefits. However, we
of these coastal wetlands to shift from carbon sinks to recommend that the efforts of national governments
carbon sources through anthropogenic degradation to implement climate mitigation strategies and reduce
further supports the need for their conservation and emissions should focus on coastal blue carbon ecosys-
restoration. Coastal wetlands should be integrated into tems that represent critical and manageable carbon
national GHG inventories and climate mitigation strate- sinks.
gies, and indeed this has been recommended by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) JJ Acknowledgements
(Hiraishi et al. 2014). To follow the IPCC guidance,
countries should conduct national carbon assessments for We thank P Megonigal and J Fourqurean for helpful
their coastal wetlands to determine existing carbon discussions and comments. ASG was supported by
stocks and estimates of emissions from converted ecosys- NOAA grant NA14NES4320003 (Cooperative Institute
tems, as well as threats and rates of loss to inform manage- for Climate and Satellites – CICS) at the University
ment efforts. These initial steps provide the background of Maryland/ESSIC. EM was supported by The Nature
knowledge needed to inform national policy, including Conservancy and the German Federal Ministry for the
GHG inventories, but also the development (or revision) Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety
of national strategies to manage coastal wetland carbon (BMUB), as part of the International Climate Initiative
sinks and sources. (IKI); the BMUB supports this initiative on the basis
Coastal wetlands are included in existing frameworks of a decision adopted by the German Bundestag. DH
under the UNFCCC (eg Nationally Appropriate was supported by IUCN and the Prince Albert II de
Mitigation Actions [NAMAs]; REDD+; Land Use, Monaco Foundation as part of their Blue Carbon grant.
JJ References Graham MH, Kinlan BP, Druehl LD, et al. 2007. Deep-water kelp 49
Atkinson A, Siegel V, Pakhomov EA, et al. 2008. Oceanic refugia as potential hotspots of tropical marine diversity and
circumpolar habitats of Antarctic krill. Mar Ecol-Prog Ser 362: productivity. P Natl Acad Sci USA 104: 16576–80.
1–23. Green EP and Short FT (Eds). 2003. World atlas of seagrasses.
Atkinson A, Siegel V, Pakhomov EA, et al. 2009. A re-appraisal of Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
the total biomass and annual production of Antarctic krill. Hiraishi T, Krug T, Tanabe K, et al. (Eds). 2014. Supplement to the
Deep-Sea Res 56: 727–40. 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories:
Barrett PM, Resing JA, Buck NJ, et al. 2014. Calcium carbonate wetlands. Geneva, Switzerland: IPCC.
dissolution in the upper 1000 m of the eastern North Atlantic. Houghton JT, Jenkins GJ, and Ephraums JJ (Eds). 1990. Climate
Global Biogeochem Cy 28: 386–97. change: the IPCC scientific assessment. Report prepared for
Borges AV, Delille B, and Frankignoulle M. 2005. Budgeting sinks Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change by Working
and sources of CO2 in the coastal ocean: diversity of ecosystems Group I. Cambridge, UK; New York, NY; and Melbourne,
counts. Geophys Res Lett 32: L14601. Australia: Cambridge University Press.
Buitenhuis E, Vogt M, Moriarty R, et al. 2013. MAREDAT: Kauffman JB, Heider C, Norfolk J, and Payton F. 2014. Carbon
towards a world atlas of MARine Ecosystem DATa. Earth stocks of intact mangroves and carbon emissions arising from
System Sci Data 5: 227–39. their conversion in the Dominican Republic. Ecol Appl 24:
Charpy-Roubaud C and Sournia A. 1990. The comparative estima- 518–27.
tion of phytoplanktonic, microphytobenthic and macrophyto- Kennedy H, Beggins J, Duarte CM, et al. 2010. Seagrass sediments
benthic primary production in the oceans. Mar Microb Food as a global carbon sink: isotopic constraints. Global Biogeochem
Webs 4: 31–57. Cy 24: GB4026.
Chung IK, Oak JH, Lee JA, et al. 2013. Installing kelp forests/ Khatiwala S, Primeau F, and Hall T. 2009. Reconstruction of the
seaweed beds for mitigation and adaptation against global history of anthropogenic CO2 concentrations in the ocean.
warming: Korean Project Overview. ICES J Mar Sci 70: Nature 462: 346–49.
1038–44. Kleypas J. 1997. Modeled estimates of global reef habitat and
Committee on Geoengineering Climate. 2015. Technical eval carbonate production since the last glacial maximum.
uation and discussion of impacts. Climate intervention: car- Paleoceanography 12: 533–45.
bon dioxide removal and reliable sequestration. Report no Laffoley D, Baxter JM, Thevenon F, and Oliver J (Eds). 2014. The
9780309305297. Washington, DC: National Academies significance and management of natural carbon stores in the
Press. open ocean. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.
Denman KL, Brasseur G, Chidthaisong A, et al. 2007. Couplings Lam PJ, Doney SC, and Bishop JK. 2011. The dynamic ocean
between changes in the climate system and biogeochemistry. biological pump: insights from a global compilation of particulate
In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, et al. (Eds). Climate organic carbon, CaCO3, and opal concentration profiles from
change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of the mesopelagic. Global Biogeochem Cy 25: GB3009.
Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Lutz SJ and Martin AH. 2014. Fish carbon: exploring marine verte-
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK, brate carbon services. Arendal, Norway: GRID-Arendal.
and New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Mathez EA. 2013. Climate change: the science of global warming
Duarte CM, Borum J, Short FT, and Walker DI. 2005a. Seagrass and our energy future. New York, NY: Columbia University
ecosystems: their global status and prospects. In: Polunin NVC Press.
(Ed). Aquatic ecosystems: trends and global prospects. Mcleod E, Chmura GL, Bouillon S, et al. 2011. A blueprint for blue
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. carbon: toward an improved understanding of the role of vege-
Duarte CM, Losada IJ, Hendriks IE, et al. 2013. The role of coastal tated coastal habitats in sequestering CO2. Front Ecol Environ
plant communities for climate change mitigation and 9: 552–60.
adaptation. Nature Climate Change 3: 961–68. Muraoka D. 2004. Seaweed resources as a source of carbon fixation.
Duarte CM, Marbà N, Gacia E, et al. 2010. Seagrass community Bull Fish Res Ag Japan 1: 59–64.
metabolism: assessing the carbon sink capacity of seagrass Pakhomov EA, Froneman PW, and Perssinotto R. 2002. Salp/krill
meadows. Global Biogeochem Cy 24: GB4032. interactions in the Southern Ocean: spatial segregation
Duarte CM, Middelburg JJ, and Caraco NF. 2005b. Major role of and implications for the carbon flux. Deep-Sea Res Pt II 49:
marine vegetation on the oceanic carbon cycle. Biogeosciences 1881–907.
2: 1–8. Pan Y, Birdsey RA, Fang J, et al. 2011. A large and persistent
Eyre BD, Andersson AJ, and Cyronak T. 2014. Benthic coral reef carbon sink in the world’s forests. Science 333: 988–93.
calcium carbonate dissolution in an acidifying ocean. Nature Pendleton L, Donato DC, Murray BC, et al. 2012. Estimating
Climate Change 4: 969–76. global “blue carbon” emissions from conversion and degra
Falkowski P. 2012. Ocean science: the power of plankton. Nature dation of vegetated coastal ecosystems. PLoS ONE 7: e43542.
483: S17–S20. Russell LM, Rasch PJ, Mace GM, et al. 2012. Ecosystem impacts of
Frankignoulle M, Canon C, and Gattuso JP. 1994. Marine geoengineering: a review for developing a science plan. Ambio
calcification as a source of carbon dioxide: positive feedback 41: 350–69.
of increasing atmospheric CO2. Limnol Oceanogr 39: 458– Sabine CL, Feely RA, Gruber N, et al. 2004. The oceanic sink for
62. anthropogenic CO2. Science 305: 367–71.
Gattuso JP, Allemand D, and Frankignoulle M. 1999. Shaw EC, Phinn SR, Tilbrook B, and Steven A. 2015. Natural in
Photosynthesis and calcification at cellular, organismal and situ relationships suggest coral reef calcium carbonate produc-
community levels in coral reefs: a review on interactions and tion will decline with ocean acidification. Limnol Oceanogr 60:
control by carbonate chemistry. Am Zool 39: 160–83. 777–88.
Gattuso JP, Frankignoulle M, and Wollast R. 1998. Carbon and Smale DA, Burrows MT, Moore P, et al. 2013. Threats and knowl-
carbonate metabolism in coastal aquatic ecosystems. Ann Rev edge gaps for ecosystem services provided by kelp forests: a
Ecol Syst 29: 405–34. Northeast Atlantic perspective. Ecol Evol 3: 4016–38.
Giri C, Ochieng E, Tieszen LL, et al. 2011. Status and distribution Spalding H, Foster MS, and Heine JN. 2003. Composition, distri-
of mangrove forests of the world using Earth observation satel- bution, and abundance of deep-water (> 30 m) macroalgae in
lite data. Global Ecol Biogeogr 20: 154–59. central California. J Phycol 39: 273–84.
Spalding M, Kainuma M, and Collins L. 2010. World atlas of Waycott M, Duarte CM, Carruthers TJB, et al. 2009. Accelerating
50 mangroves. London, UK, and Washington, DC: Earthscan. loss of seagrasses across the globe threatens coastal ecosystems.
Spalding M, Ravilious C, and Green E. 2001. World atlas of P Natl Acad Sci USA 106: 12377–81.
coral reefs. Prepared at the UNEP World Conservation Woosley RJ, Millero FJ, and Grosell M. 2012. The solubility of
Monitoring Centre. Berkeley, CA: University of California- fish-produced high magnesium calcite in seawater. J Geophys
Berkeley. Res 117: C04018.
Suzuki A and Kawahata H. 2003. Carbon budget of coral reef
systems: an overview of observations in fringing reefs, barrier
JJ Supporting Information
reefs and atolls in the Indo-Pacific regions. Tellus B 55:
428–44.
Ware JR, Smith SV, and Reaka-Kudla ML. 1992. Coral reefs: Additional, web-only material may be found in the
sources or sinks of atmospheric CO2? Coral Reefs 11: online version of this article at http://onlinelibrary.
127–30. wiley.com/doi/10.1002/fee.1451/suppinfo
The Department of Biological Sciences at the University at Buffalo is seeking outstanding applicants for a tenured/tenure track faculty position (open
rank) in freshwater molecular ecology. A competitive startup package will be provided to the successful candidate.
The University at Buffalo (UB) is the largest and most comprehensive campus in the State University of New York (SUNY) system. The Department of
Biological Sciences is a comprehensive center for innovative, interdisciplinary life sciences research. The faculty position is offered as part of the newly
established Institute on Research and Education in Energy, Environment and Water (RENEW) at UB in its Freshwater Coastal Ecosystems & the Blue
Economy focus area. The goal of this focus area is to advance research in water and environmental sustainability. As such, the successful candidate
will work in an interdisciplinary group of highly collaborative faculty whose research impacts all areas of freshwater science, including engineering,
economics, and environmental policy management. Further details on RENEW and the focus area can be found at https://www.buffalo.edu/renew.html.
The successful candidate will be expected to maintain an externally funded research program and to participate in graduate and undergraduate teaching.
Successful candidates are envisioned to articulate “T-shaped” research programs that combine deep disciplinary studies with interdisciplinary work to
advance the research and teaching missions of the University at Buffalo, the RENEW Institute and the Department of Biological Sciences.
Applicants should have a Ph.D. (or other doctorate degree), at least two years of postdoctoral experience, a scholarly publication record and fluency in
both spoken and written English. Candidates at the senior level should have an exceptional record of research funding and display leadership in their
field.
To apply, electronically submit a curriculum vitae, description of current and future research interests (3 pages maximum), and copies of published or in
press publications (no more than five) from recent work to: https://www.ubjobs.buffalo.edu/applicants/Central?quickFind=59630. Applications will be
reviewed upon completion, but for full consideration should be received by February 15, 2017. Please consult our website (http://www.biology.buffalo.
edu) for information about UB, our department and our community.
UB is an AA/EOE and welcomes all to apply including veterans and individuals with disabilities.