4 ms·

The problem is that the ocean is not amenable to random sampling in the same way that, say, Twitter accounts are; phytoplankton are going to be differentially-d

The problem is that the ocean is not amenable to random sampling in the same way that, say, Twitter accounts are; phytoplankton are going to be differentially-distributed depending on where in the euphotic zone you're sampling, which latitudes, distance to land, time of year, and so on, which is why longitudinal biodiversity studies are carried out in specific areas. It's vanishingly unlikely that 500 water samples of unknown provenance (and I'm curious why they weren't sampling using the standard method of towed plankton nets) can demonstrate a global extinction event of all plankton, though it could indicate a loss of biodiversity in certain areas. God knows we're working hard to empty out our oceans, but I'm not sure that this paper demonstrates what they claim.

chomp 4y ago
> and I'm curious why they weren't sampling using the standard method of towed plankton nets Because the GOES Foundation use volunteer yachts to collect the data: https://www.goesfoundation.com/citizen-science-project/ https://www.goesfoundation.com/citizen-science-project/ >Twice a day, (if possible) we want you to take a 0.5 litre of sea water, put it through a GOES filter (developed by Dr.Jesus Ramon Barriuso Diez), count plankton, microplastics (fibres and beads) and any other particles which are over 20 microns. I believe they went with this method because it's easier for non-scientists to contribute to their study. They mention nets, but you're right in being suspicious in the method of collection. It does not seem like it uses best practices.
- corncob15 4y ago
  Not a marine biologist, but this seems like it would explain their entire findings. Yachts tend to hang out more around the tropics and less around murky waters in, say, the North Atlantic. Clear water, such as you'd find in the Bahamas, is clear precisely because of lower plankton populations[1]. By collecting data off of pleasure boats, they're corrupting the data right off the bat! 1: https://www.businessinsider.com/why-some-beaches-have-clear-blue-water-and-others-are-gray-2016-7 https://www.businessinsider.com/why-some-beaches-have-clear-...
  - f7fg_u-_h 4y ago
    Great points, and additionally pleasure yachts stay relatively near coasts most of the time and don't navigate the deep water.
- kelnos 4y ago
  > I believe they went with this method because it's easier for non-scientists to contribute to their study. Which should probably cast their study in an even more negative light. Even ignoring the fact that the samples were collected contrary to a standard method, we can't be sure the samples collected by random people were actually all done in a similar way as each other.
hinkley 4y ago
Climate change could not only affect the viability of plankton, but also shift ocean and air currents. Sampling at the same GPS coordinates could give very different results from one year to the next. If the plankton counts suddenly shot up 2 orders of magnitude in a location, I expect that would cause a lot of questions to be asked that might result in more accurate results. But a decline or increase of 25% might just be assumed to be population fluctuations instead of a shift.

chomp 4y ago

> and I'm curious why they weren't sampling using the standard method of towed plankton nets Because the GOES Foundation use volunteer yachts to collect the data: https://www.goesfoundation.com/citizen-science-project/ https://www.goesfoundation.com/citizen-science-project/ >Twice a day, (if possible) we want you to take a 0.5 litre of sea water, put it through a GOES filter (developed by Dr.Jesus Ramon Barriuso Diez), count plankton, microplastics (fibres and beads) and any other particles which are over 20 microns. I believe they went with this method because it's easier for non-scientists to contribute to their study. They mention nets, but you're right in being suspicious in the method of collection. It does not seem like it uses best practices.

corncob15 4y ago
Not a marine biologist, but this seems like it would explain their entire findings. Yachts tend to hang out more around the tropics and less around murky waters in, say, the North Atlantic. Clear water, such as you'd find in the Bahamas, is clear precisely because of lower plankton populations[1]. By collecting data off of pleasure boats, they're corrupting the data right off the bat! 1: https://www.businessinsider.com/why-some-beaches-have-clear-blue-water-and-others-are-gray-2016-7 https://www.businessinsider.com/why-some-beaches-have-clear-...
- f7fg_u-_h 4y ago
  Great points, and additionally pleasure yachts stay relatively near coasts most of the time and don't navigate the deep water.
kelnos 4y ago
> I believe they went with this method because it's easier for non-scientists to contribute to their study. Which should probably cast their study in an even more negative light. Even ignoring the fact that the samples were collected contrary to a standard method, we can't be sure the samples collected by random people were actually all done in a similar way as each other.

hinkley 4y ago

Climate change could not only affect the viability of plankton, but also shift ocean and air currents. Sampling at the same GPS coordinates could give very different results from one year to the next. If the plankton counts suddenly shot up 2 orders of magnitude in a location, I expect that would cause a lot of questions to be asked that might result in more accurate results. But a decline or increase of 25% might just be assumed to be population fluctuations instead of a shift.