DOCSLIB.ORG

Effect of Salinity Induced Ph Changes on Benthic Foraminifera

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Effect of Salinity Induced Ph Changes on Benthic Foraminifera Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Biogeosciences Discuss., 8, 8423–8450, 2011 www.biogeosciences-discuss.net/8/8423/2011/ Biogeosciences doi:10.5194/bgd-8-8423-2011 Discussions BGD © Author(s) 2011. CC Attribution 3.0 License. 8, 8423–8450, 2011 This discussion paper is/has been under review for the journal Biogeosciences (BG). Effect of salinity Please refer to the corresponding final paper in BG if available. induced pH changes on benthic foraminifera R. Saraswat et al. Effect of salinity induced pH changes on benthic foraminifera: a laboratory culture Title Page experiment Abstract Introduction Conclusions References R. Saraswat, M. Kouthanker, S. Kurtarkar, R. Nigam, and V. N. Linshy Tables Figures Micropaleontology Laboratory, National Institute of Oceanography, Goa, 403004, India J I Received: 4 August 2011 – Accepted: 15 August 2011 – Published: 23 August 2011 Correspondence to: R. Saraswat ([email protected]) J I Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. Back Close Full Screen / Esc Printer-friendly Version Interactive Discussion 8423 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Abstract BGD The coastal water pH varies with salinity. Therefore, to study the effect of salinity in- duced pH variations on benthic foraminifera, live specimens of Rosalina globularis were 8, 8423–8450, 2011 subjected to different salinities (10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35 and 40 ‰) with pH varying from 5 7.2 to 8.2. A total of 210 specimens were used and the experiment was conducted in Effect of salinity replicates. It was observed that the salinity induced pH changes affect the calcification induced pH changes of foraminifera. However the response is not linear. The maximum growth is reported in on benthic the specimens kept at 35 ‰ salinity (pH 8.0) while the rest of the specimens maintained foraminifera at salinity higher or lower than 35 ‰, showed comparatively lesser growth. A significant 10 drop in pH severely hampers the calcification capability of benthic foraminifera. Spec- R. Saraswat et al. imens kept at 10 and 15 ‰ (pH 7.2 and 7.5, respectively) became opaque within two days of lowering the salinity and later on their tests dissolved within 24 and 43 days, respectively. Besides calcification capability, pH also affects reproduction. No speci- Title Page men reproduced at 10 and 15 ‰ salinity while only a few specimens (3 %) reproduced Abstract Introduction 15 at 20 ‰. As compared to 10–20 ‰ salinity, ∼ 60 % reproduction was observed in spec- imens subjected to 25–40 ‰ salinity. The drop in pH also decreased the calcification Conclusions References rate as specimens at 20 ‰ salinity took twice the time to reach maturity than normal Tables Figures range (25–40 ‰). We conclude that salinity induced drop in pH adversely affects the calcification capability and reproduction in benthic foraminifera. It is inferred that the J I 20 time required to reach reproductive maturity increases at the extreme salinity tolerance limits. However, beyond a certain limit, a further increase in pH does not affect benthic J I foraminifera; rather they respond to salinity as per their salinity tolerance range. Back Close 1 Introduction Full Screen / Esc While the increasing open ocean acidification (OA) is the result of enormous input Printer-friendly Version 25 of CO2 in the atmosphere by various anthropogenic activities (Caldeira and Wickett, 2003), local factors like fresh water runoff, coastal erosion, fertilizer input have also Interactive Discussion 8424 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | lead to the development of regions of increased ocean acidification (Doney et al., 2007, 2009; Cheung et al., 2009; Cooley and Doney, 2009; Kelly et al., 2011). Such shallow BGD water OA zones are responsible for the declining fish catch, changing marine diver- 8, 8423–8450, 2011 sity and ocean ecosystem (Cheung et al., 2009; Doney et al., 2009). However, the 5 capability of marine organisms to adapt to the increasing OA is not well known. Lab- oratory culture studies have shown that marine calcifiers will be adversely affected Effect of salinity under increasing ocean acidification as decline in seawater pH hampers the capability induced pH changes of marine calcareous organisms to secrete calcite (Gattuso et al., 1998; Bijma, 1999; on benthic Marubini and Atkinson, 1999; Leclercq et al., 2000; Riebesell et al., 2000; Langdon foraminifera 10 et al., 2000). The response, however is not uniform as increased calcification under projected OA has been reported in case of a few taxa (Iglesias-Rodrıguez et al., 2008; R. Saraswat et al. Ries et al., 2009). The growth of a few non calcifying organisms also increases under high CO2 conditions (Palacios and Zimmerman, 2007). Therefore the effect of OA on Title Page marine organisms has to be studied in detail. The benthic foraminifers, unicellular pref- 15 erentially marine microorganisms are amongst the dominant group of organisms with Abstract Introduction calcareous exoskeleton (test), living in the shallow water regions of the world oceans. Conclusions References The foraminifers sequester huge amount of CO2 and help in its removal from the atmo- sphere, thus helping in mitigating the effect of anthropogenic CO2. It is expected that Tables Figures calcareous benthic foraminifers will also be adversely affected due to the increasing 20 ocean acidification. However benthic foraminifera are capable of increasing the pH of J I vacuolized seawater at the site of calcification by one unit above seawater pH to secret calcite (Nooijer et al., 2009). The capability of benthic foraminifers to modulate the J I pH of vacuolized seawater under different seawater pH conditions is not known. Even Back Close the lowest pH that calcareous benthic foraminifera can tolerate is not clear (ter Kuile 25 et al., 1989; Le Cadre et al., 2003; Kuroyanagi et al., 2009; Kurtarkar et al., 2011). It Full Screen / Esc is expected that the pH tolerance range will vary from species to species as different benthic foraminiferal species are adapted to different habitats. Under such a scenario it Printer-friendly Version is difficult to predict the response of benthic foraminifers to increasing ocean acidifica- tion. Controlled laboratory culture studies can help understand the response of benthic Interactive Discussion 8425 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | foraminifera to OA. Since riverine influx is one of the major factors for the development of localized zones of increased ocean acidification (Padmavati and Goswami, 1996; BGD Kurtarkar et al., 2011), here we have studied the response of benthic foraminifera to 8, 8423–8450, 2011 salinity induced seawater pH changes, under controlled conditions in laboratory. 5 2 Materials and method Effect of salinity induced pH changes To understand the relationship between seawater salinity and pH, water samples were on benthic collected from the Mandovi and Zuari estuaries which bring freshwater to the shallow foraminifera water coastal regions off Goa during the southwest monsoon season. The water was collected from the mouth of the estuaries till the inner reaches (to cover a wide range of R. Saraswat et al. 10 salinity) by using Niskin water sampler. The water was transferred into narrow mouth 1 l bottles and kept in dark and its salinity and pH was measured on the same day by using autocell and pH meter. Title Page To get live benthic foraminifera specimens, material including the top 1 cm of the Abstract Introduction sediments as well as sea grass attached to the perennially submerged rocky cliffs was 15 collected from the waters off Dias beach, Goa coast. The sea water was also collected Conclusions References for further use in laboratory as media. The sea grass was transferred to a plastic tub containing sea water and shaked vigorously to detach foraminifera attached to it. Tables Figures The entire material was sieved through 1000 and 63 µm sieves to remove extraneous material. After thoroughly cleaning the sample, 63–1000 µm fraction was transferred to J I 20 glass beakers with sea water. J I In the laboratory, the material was scanned under stereo-zoom microscope (Olym- pus SZX16) to separate live benthic foraminifera. Probable live specimens were Back Close picked using a micropipette or a very fine tipped brush and transferred to multi-well Full Screen / Esc (6-wells) culture petri-dishes (Axygen). The live specimens separated under binocular 25 microscope were subsequently scanned under inverted microscope (Nikon ECLIPSE Printer-friendly Version TE2000-U) for pseudopodial activity, movement, food collection, etc., to confirm their live status. Once confirmed to be live, the specimens were divided into several Interactive Discussion batches and kept at different ecological conditions (salinity varying from 20 to 40 ‰ and 8426 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | temperature varying from 15 to 30 ◦C) to facilitate reproduction. The offsprings of the reproduced specimens, that is the juveniles with two-three chambers, were subjected BGD to different salinities. All the juveniles were taken from specimens kept at 35 ‰ salinity 8, 8423–8450, 2011 as maximum reproduction was observed at this salinity. The advantage of conducting 5 experiments on juveniles is that there is ample time for the specimens to respond to physico-chemical conditions, before they mature and reproduce. Effect of salinity The experimental specimens were subjected to seven different salinities (10, 15, induced pH changes 20, 25, 30, 35, 40 ‰) with pH varying from 7.2 to 8.2. This salinity range was se- on benthic lected based on continuous monitoring of physico-chemical parameters in the field foraminifera 10 from where live specimens were collected (Rodrigues, 1984; Nigam et al., 2008), and ◦ R. Saraswat et al. expected possible change in salinity in future. Temperature (27 C) was kept constant throughout the experiment. Five juvenile specimens were kept in each well of the 6-well culture petri-dish and thus each dish contained 30 specimens.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Planktonic Protist Interactome: Where Do We Stand After a Century of Research?
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/587352; this version posted May 2, 2019. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. Bjorbækmo et al., 23.03.2019 – preprint copy - BioRxiv The planktonic protist interactome: where do we stand after a century of research? Marit F. Markussen Bjorbækmo1*, Andreas Evenstad1* and Line Lieblein Røsæg1*, Anders K. Krabberød1**, and Ramiro Logares2,1** 1 University of Oslo, Department of Biosciences, Section for Genetics and Evolutionary Biology (Evogene), Blindernv. 31, N- 0316 Oslo, Norway 2 Institut de Ciències del Mar (CSIC), Passeig Marítim de la Barceloneta, 37-49, ES-08003, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain * The three authors contributed equally ** Corresponding authors: Ramiro Logares: Institute of Marine Sciences (ICM-CSIC), Passeig Marítim de la Barceloneta 37-49, 08003, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain. Phone: 34-93-2309500; Fax: 34-93-2309555. [email protected] Anders K. Krabberød: University of Oslo, Department of Biosciences, Section for Genetics and Evolutionary Biology (Evogene), Blindernv. 31, N-0316 Oslo, Norway. Phone +47 22845986, Fax: +47 22854726. [email protected] Abstract Microbial interactions are crucial for Earth ecosystem function, yet our knowledge about them is limited and has so far mainly existed as scattered records. Here, we have surveyed the literature involving planktonic protist interactions and gathered the information in a manually curated Protist Interaction DAtabase (PIDA). In total, we have registered ~2,500 ecological interactions from ~500 publications, spanning the last 150 years.
    [Show full text]
  • 33. Cretaceous and Paleogene Planktonic Foraminifera, Leg 27 of the Deep Sea Drilling Project V
    33. CRETACEOUS AND PALEOGENE PLANKTONIC FORAMINIFERA, LEG 27 OF THE DEEP SEA DRILLING PROJECT V. A. Krasheninnikov, Geological Institute of the Academy of Sciences, Moscow, USSR ABSTRACT Cretaceous and Cenozoic sediments, penetrated by Sites 259, 260, 261, and 263 in the eastern part of the Indian Ocean, are mainly brown zeolite clays and turbidites. Small quantities of calcareous clays and nanno ooze with planktonic foraminifera are intercalated with the clays and have Albian, upper Paleocene, and lower Eocene ages. The Albian sediments at Site 259 are characterized only by Hedbergella species (infracretacea, globigerinellinoides, planispira, amabilis, aff. delrioensis, aff. infracretacea). At Site 260 planktonic foraminifera are more diverse; in addition to the above-mentioned species there are other species of Hedbergella (trocoidea brittonensis) and representatives of Globigerinelloides (eaglefordensis, bentonensis, ultramicra, gyroidinaeformis, aff. maridalensis). Assemblages of planktonic foraminifera of the upper Paleocene (the Globorotalia velascoensis Zone) at Site 259 consist of comparatively rare species of Acarinina (acarinata, mckannai, primitival and Glpbigerina (chascanona, nana) combined with sporadic Globorotalia (imitata, aff. acuta). Sediments of the lower part of the lower Eocene at Site 259 are characterized by rare Acarinina (pseudotopilensis, soldadoensis, acarinata, aff. triplex) and casts of Globorotalia from the group of Globorotalia aequa— G. subbotinae—G. marginodentata. Turbidites contain rather frequently redeposited Cretaceous, Paleogene, and Neogene planktonic foraminifera. LOWER CRETACEOUS (ALBIAN) Lower Cretaceous sediments, Albian, with planktonic _____^^ ""W••l•i i•i•r;•i•: foraminifera have been identified in two regions of the Indian Ocean—the Perth Abyssal Plain in the south (Site 259) and the Gascoyne Abyssal Plain in the north (Site 260).
    [Show full text]
  • Troubleshooting Activated Sludge Processes Introduction
    Troubleshooting Activated Sludge Processes Introduction Excess Foam High Effluent Suspended Solids High Effluent Soluble BOD or Ammonia Low effluent pH Introduction Review of the literature shows that the activated sludge process has experienced operational problems since its inception. Although they did not experience settling problems with their activated sludge, Ardern and Lockett (Ardern and Lockett, 1914a) did note increased turbidity and reduced nitrification with reduced temperatures. By the early 1920s continuous-flow systems were having to deal with the scourge of activated sludge, bulking (Ardem and Lockett, 1914b, Martin 1927) and effluent suspended solids problems. Martin (1927) also describes effluent quality problems due to toxic and/or high-organic- strength industrial wastes. Oxygen demanding materials would bleedthrough the process. More recently, Jenkins, Richard and Daigger (1993) discussed severe foaming problems in activated sludge systems. Experience shows that controlling the activated sludge process is still difficult for many plants in the United States. However, improved process control can be obtained by systematically looking at the problems and their potential causes. Once the cause is defined, control actions can be initiated to eliminate the problem. Problems associated with the activated sludge process can usually be related to four conditions (Schuyler, 1995). Any of these can occur by themselves or with any of the other conditions. The first is foam. So much foam can accumulate that it becomes a safety problem by spilling out onto walkways. It becomes a regulatory problem as it spills from clarifier surfaces into the effluent. The second, high effluent suspended solids, can be caused by many things. It is the most common problem found in activated sludge systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Chemical Industry Wastewater Treatment
    CHEMICAL INDUSTRY WASTEWATER TREATMENT Fayza A. Nasr\ Hala S. Doma\ Hisham S Abdel-Halim", Saber A. El-Shafai* * Water Pollution Research department, National Research Centre, Cairo, Egypt "Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt Abstract Treatment of chemical industrial wastewater from building and construction chemicals factory and plastic shoes manufacturing factory was investigated. The two factories discharge their wastewater into the public sewerage network. The results showed the wastewater discharged from the building and construction chemicals factory was highly contaminated with organic compounds. The average values of COD and BOD were 2912 and 150 mg02/l. Phenol concentration up to 0.3 mg/l was detected. Chemical treatment using lime aided with ferric chloride proved to be effective and produced an effluent characteristics in compliance with Egyptian permissible limits. With respect to the other factory, industrial wastewater was mixed with domestic wastewater in order to lower the organic load. The COD, BOD values after mixing reached 5239 and 2615 mg02/l. The average concentration of phenol was 0.5 mg/l. Biological treatment using activated sludge or rotating biological contactor (RBC) proved to be an effective treatment system in terms of producing an effluent characteristic within the permissible limits set by the law. Therefore, the characteristics of chemical industrial wastewater determine which treatment system to utilize. Based on laboratory results TESCE, Vol. 30, No.2 <@> December 2004 engineering design of each treatment system was developed and cost estimate prepared. Key words: chemical industry, wastewater, treatment, chemical, biological Introduction The chemical industry is of importance in terms of its impact on the environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Industrial Wastewater Treatment Technologies Fitxategia
    INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES Image by Frauke Feind from Pixabay licensed under CC0 Estibaliz Saez de Camara Oleaga & Eduardo de la Torre Pascual Faculty of Engineering Bilbao (UPV/EHU) Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering Industrial Wastewaters (IWW) means the water or liquid that carries waste from industrial or processes, if it is distinct from domestic wastewater. Desalination plant “Rambla Morales desalination plant (Almería - Spain)” by David Martínez Vicente from Flickr licensed under CC BY 2.0 IWW may result from any process or activity of industry which uses water as a reactant or for transportation of heat or materials. 2 Characteristics of wastewater from industrial sources vary with the type and the size of the facility and the on-site treatment methods, if any. Because of this variation, it is often difficult to define typical operating conditions for industrial activities. Options available for the treatment of IWW are summarized briefly in next figure. To introduce in a logical order in the description of treatment techniques, the relationship between pollutants and respective typical treatment technology is taken as reference. 1. Removal of suspended solids and insoluble liquids 2. Removal of inorganic, non-biodegradable or poorly degradable soluble content 3. Removal of biodegradable soluble content 3 Range of wastewater treatments in relation to type of contaminants. Source: BREF http://eippcb.jrc.ec.europa.eu/reference/ 4 3.1. CLASSIFICATION OF INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENTS CLASSIFICATION OF EFFLUENTS
    [Show full text]
  • Protozoa and Oxygen
    Acta Protozool. (2014) 53: 3–12 http://www.eko.uj.edu.pl/ap ActA doi:10.4467/16890027AP.13.0020.1117 Protozoologica Special issue: Marine Heterotrophic Protists Guest editors: John R. Dolan and David J. S. Montagnes Review paper Protozoa and Oxygen Tom FENCHEL Marine Biological Laboratory, University of Copenhagen, Denmark Abstract. Aerobic protozoa can maintain fully aerobic metabolic rates even at very low O2-tensions; this is related to their small sizes. Many – or perhaps all – protozoa show particular preferences for a given range of O2-tensions. The reasons for this and the role for their distribution in nature are discussed and examples of protozoan biota in O2-gradients in aquatic systems are presented. Facultative anaerobes capable of both aerobic and anaerobic growth are probably common within several protozoan taxa. It is concluded that further progress in this area is contingent on physiological studies of phenotypes. Key words: Protozoa, chemosensory behavior, oxygen, oxygen toxicity, microaerobic protozoa, facultative anaerobes, microaerobic and anaerobic habitats. INTRODUCTION low molecular weight organics and in some cases H2 as metabolic end products. Some ciliates and foraminifera use nitrate as a terminal electron acceptor in a respira- Increasing evidence suggests that the last common tory process (for a review on anaerobic protozoa, see ancestor of extant eukaryotes was mitochondriate and Fenchel 2011). had an aerobic energy metabolism. While representa- The great majority of protozoan species, however, tives of different protist taxa have secondarily adapted depend on aerobic energy metabolism. Among pro- to an anaerobic life style, all known protists possess ei- tists with an aerobic metabolism many – or perhaps ther mitochondria capable of oxidative phosphorylation all – show preferences for particular levels of oxygen or – in anaerobic species – have modified mitochon- tension below atmospheric saturation.
    [Show full text]
  • Reverse Osmosis Treatment, Rejection of Carbon Dioxide, And
    Evaluating the Impact of Reverse Osmosis Treatment on Finished Water Carbon Dioxide Concentration and pH WATERCON2012 March 21, 2012 Presented By: Jerry Phipps, P.E. Outline • Purpose • Background • Reverse Osmosis (RO) Fundamentals • Post-Treatment Processes • Pertinent Aquatic Chemistry • Case Studies • Conclusions and Recommendations • Questions Purpose • Review RO and carbonate chemistry fundamentals • Review data from full scale projects to determine change in carbon dioxide and pH from feed to permeate stream Background • The Reverse Osmosis (RO) process uses a semipermeable membrane to separate an influent stream into two streams, a purified permeate stream and a concentrated reject stream • Many references indicate that dissolved gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2) may pass through the membrane with no rejection • The combination of low alkalinity and high carbon dioxide results in an aggressive permeate stream with a lower pH than the influent stream Reverse Osmosis Membranes The most common RO membrane material today is aromatic polyamide, typically in the form of thin-film composites. They consist of a thin film of membrane, bonded to layers of other porous materials that are tightly wound to support and strengthen the membrane. Flow Recovery • Percent recovery is a key design parameter • Defined as permeate flow / influent flow • Recovery is limited by solubility products, Ksp • Typical value for groundwater is ~75%-85%, but varies with application • Example: Influent stream = 100 gpm, 75% recovery. Permeate stream = 75 gpm,
    [Show full text]
  • The Ph of Drinking Water
    The pH of drinking water The pH is a measure of the acidity or alkalinity. The water quality regulations specify that the pH of tap water should be between 6.5 and 9.5. What is pH and why do we test our Why has the pH of my water changed? water for it? If the problem only affects your property, the The pH is a numerical value used to indicate source is most likely your internal pipework and the degree to which water is acidic. pH plumbing. Possible sources include plumbed-in measurements range between 0 (strong acid) water filters or softeners, incorrectly installed and 14 (strong alkali), with 7 being neutral. The washing machines or dishwashers, incorrect water quality regulations specify that the pH fittings and taps supplied from storage tanks. of water at your tap should be between 6.5 If you have had plumbing work done recently and 9.5. Water leaving our treatment works then excessive use of solder or flux could be typically has a pH between 7 and 8, but this the cause. In this case the problem may lessen can change as it passes through the network of as water is used. Alternatively you may wish to reservoirs and water mains. consider changing the pipework or joints. We consume many different foods and beverages with a large range of pH. Your water quality For example, citrus fruits like oranges, lemons If you’re interested in finding out more about and limes are quite acidic (pH = 2.0 - 4.0). the quality of your drinking water, please visit Carbonated drinks such as cola have a pH unitedutilities.com/waterquality and enter your 4.0 to 4.5.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Your Watershed- What Is
    Understanding Your Watershed pH NR/WQ/2005-19 Nancy Mesner and John Geiger June 2005 (pr) What is pH? pH is a measurement of how acidic or how basic (alkaline) a solution is. When substances dissolve in water they produce charged molecules called ions. Acidic water contains extra hydrogen ions (H+) and basic water contains extra hydroxyl (OH-) ions. pH is measured on a scale of 0 to 14. Water that is neutral has a pH of 7. Acidic water has pH values less than 7, with 0 being the most acidic. Likewise, basic water has values greater than 7, with 14 being the most basic. A change of 1 unit on a pH scale represents a 10 fold change in the pH, so that water with pH of 6 is 10 times more acidic than water with a pH of 7, and water with a pH of 5 is 100 times more acidic than water with a pH of 7. You might expect rainwater to be neutral, but it is actually somewhat acidic. As rain drops fall through the atmosphere, they dissolve gaseous carbon dioxide, creating a weak acid. Pure rainfall has a pH of about 5.6. The figure below shows the pH of some common solutions. The pH of lakes and rivers in Utah typically falls between 6.5 and 9.0. Why is the pH of water important? Effects on animals and plants Most aquatic animals and plants have adapted to life in water with a specific pH and may suffer from even a slight change.
    [Show full text]
  • Ph in Drinking-Water
    WHO/SDE/WSH/07.01/1 pH in Drinking-water Revised background document for development of WHO Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality © World Health Organization 2007 This document may be freely reviewed, abstracted, reproduced and translated in part or in whole but not for sale or for use in conjunction with commercial purposes. Inquiries should be addressed to: [email protected]. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this document do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or of certain manufacturers’ products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by the World Health Organization in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the names of proprietary products are distinguished by initial capital letters. The World Health Organization does not warrant that the information contained in this publication is complete and correct and shall not be liable for any damages incurred as a result of its use. Preface One of the primary goals of WHO and its member states is that “all people, whatever their stage of development and their social and economic conditions, have the right to have access to an adequate supply of safe drinking water.” A major WHO function to achieve such goals is the responsibility “to propose regulations, and to make recommendations with respect to international health matters ....” The first WHO document dealing specifically with public drinking-water quality was published in 1958 as International Standards for Drinking-water.
    [Show full text]
  • The Foraminifera.Eu Database: Concept and Status
    Palaeontologia Electronica palaeo-electronica.org The foraminifera.eu database: concept and status Michael Hesemann ABSTRACT The foraminifera.eu project with its 120 avocational and professional scientific contributors has built a popular online image database containing information about fossil and recent foraminifera. Foraminiferal data available from over 200 years of sci- entific studies and publications were first analyzed in order to create a robust database using structurable and available data-attributes. A freely accessible database with online interfaces was established to improve the accessibility of foraminiferal data. So far, the database contains 9,800+ records of specimens with images and accompany- ing metadata. Thirty data attributes were chosen, and discrete values were defined and applied to each dataset covering the areas of identification, geographical and strati- graphical positioning, morphology, synonyms, references, and collection related data. The attributes were chosen based on their usefulness to both avocational and profes- sional scientists and on their general availability. A discussion and review process has been established to enlarge the database by adding more records and to implement new data attributes and interfaces. In 2015, the database was accessed on average by 220 users daily (excluding bots) and 0,8 gigabytes of data were downloaded each day. The numbers indicate the utility and relevance of the foraminifera.eu database, and this is also acknowledged by senior scientists and major institutions through their con- tributions. Michael Hesemann. Foraminifera.eu Project, Waterloostrasse 24, 22769 Hamburg, Germany. [email protected] INTRODUCTION Messina, 1940-2014; Kennett and Srinivasan, 1983; Loeblich and Tappan, 1988). The basic idea Over 200 years of scientific studies and thou- of the foraminifera.eu database (FEUDAT) is to sands of publications have resulted in a huge improve the accessibility of foraminiferal data.
    [Show full text]
  • The Marine Protist Foraminifera
    International Journal of Paleobiology & Paleontology ISSN: 2642-1283 MEDWIN PUBLISHERS Committed to Create Value for researchers The Marine Protist Foraminifera Ishita D* Editorial Department of Geology, University of Calcutta, Kolkata, India Volume 3 Issue 1 Received Date: March 21, 2020 *Corresponding author: Ishita Das, Department of Geology, University of Calcutta, Kolkata, Published Date: June 02, 2020 India, Email: [email protected] The marine protist foraminifera have become a very of a revolution in the investigation of trace elements in important tool in palaeoenvironmental analysis. Foraminifera Foraminifera, and knowledge in this area is increasing rapidly. are organisms belonging to a class of amoeboid protists Culturing of live individuals has also played an important role that are characterized by streaming granular ectoplasm in this proxy development, because the potential usefulness for catching prey and they are commonly protected by an external shell. The external shell can be made up of varied Oceanographers broadly group elemental behaviour in the material although the most common material is calcium oceanof trace according elements to can the be biogeochemical verified directly cycling by experimentation. of the elements carbonate. Some species have an agglutinated test where in the ocean: [1] ‘nutrient’ proxies such as Cd, Ba and Zn the organism constructs its test or shell from the sediment which provide information on seawater nutrient, carbon and particles surrounding it. Foraminifera usually have two types carbonate levels. They show large and systematic variations of life habits – benthic or planktic. The benthic foraminifera in their seawater chemistry due to their involvement in may adapt to live on sediment-water interface (epifaunal) biological cycling; [2] ‘physical’ proxies such as Mg, Sr, F and or in the sediment at various depths (infaunal).
    [Show full text]