Drop-In Blog

SUNSCREEN SHOWDOWN: OXYBENZONE AND HOMOSALATE AND ZINC OXIDE… OH MY!

Hannah McGrath

Noah Kolander, Ichthyology Lab

Throughout most of recorded human history, we have not cared about the use of sunscreen. Or have we? It is now well known that the sun's rays can cause burns to the skin when left unprotected, but we have been trying to prevent such things for thousands of years. Initially, it was not to prevent cancer or getting sun spots but rather as a way to keep cool, prevent uncomfortable skin irritations, and, in some cases, prevent from looking like the lower class (Urbach 2001). Though trials were conducted in 1820, it wasn’t until 1900 that the same experiment was conducted where sunlight was split into “chemical rays” and heat. It was then that we realized that it was not just the heat that caused the burns but something different. This led to the invention of modern sunscreen derived from chestnut extract, which had been used in folk medicine for many years (Urbach 2001). Shortly after this revelation, in 1923, Coco Chanel returned from the French Riviera and accidentally tanned her skin, starting the craze of getting tan (BronzeTan.com 2020).

Fast forward to 2023, and we have more sunscreen and sunscreen ingredients than you can count with names that look like they came from an alien language. While not everyone is out trying to get a tan on the beach, everyone is directly affected by the sun's radiation every time they step outside. Fortunately, sunscreen technology has advanced to provide various types of sunscreen that can absorb or reflect the sun's rays, in addition to the wide variety of sun protection clothing that we have, there should be no reason for any of us to get burnt (Purohit 2017).

What seems like a straightforward solution to sun damage to the skin becomes less evident once you investigate the chemicals that make UV filtration possible.

There have been trials on the potential for active ingredients such as Benzophenone-3 (BP-3) to determine if this ingredient causes negative impacts (Watanabe 2015). The review found, though mixed results, altered birth weights and a decline in gestational age (Ghazipura 2017). I doubt any parent thinks that their sunscreen can cause gestational issues. Still, without further research, these products will continue to be sold and applied to the general public while potentially doing unknown harm to them.

(www.behealthynow.co.uk)

While human harm is a considerable concern, sunscreen and water are a pair that usually go together. On a deeper scale, sunscreen doesn’t stay put when applied to our bodies. Many sunscreen companies advocate applying more sunscreen after getting out of the water as it may come off in the water (Purohit 2017). When in the water, fish can bioaccumulate the active ingredients, disrupting endocrine function, altering behavior, and impacting development and reproduction (Lebaron 2022). Unfortunately, not all of these ingredients behave the same, and it is complicated to quantify each chemical's effect on every animal species. Aside from marine animals, studies examining marine algae’s response to BP-3 show decreased chlorophyll content and growth rate (Mao 2017).

Perhaps more commonly talked about is the effect that BP-3 has on corals. Each additional stressor adds to and exacerbates the preexisting problems in a changing climate. This, unfortunately, holds true for corals. Studies have demonstrated that BP-3 can damage all life stages of some species of corals and intensify the problem in the sunlight when most of the BP-3 pollution takes place (Downs 2017). The tourist industry that many island and tropical nations are built on is concurrently destroying the very thing that many tourists are coming to see.

This complexity intensifies the decision-making process when buying sunscreen. It involves not only considering the chemical impact of sunscreen on your body for cancer prevention or sunburn protection but also considering the broader environmental context. The ongoing issue of sunscreen-related pollutants in the environment has prompted some individuals to proactively address the matter, advocating for chemical removal methods directly from the environment.

There has been some success in wastewater treatment plants. BP-3 coming from pharmaceuticals and personal care products. The study used diammonium salt, a synthetic mediator, and acetosyringone, a natural mediator, which removed BP-3 to below a detectable level in just a couple of hours (Garcia 2011). There have also been pushes to use constructed wetlands to adsorb the chemicals or reduce them through biodegradation or plant uptake (Ilyas 2020).

Regardless of how we keep these chemicals from entering the ocean, one thing is certain: it must be done. Fortunately, ad campaigns have been somewhat successful, enacting specific chemical bans leading to lowered detection levels (Miller 2021). Sadly, there are no marketing standards or repercussions for mislabeling a bottle of sunscreen as “Reef Safe.” A study done in 2020 found that of the 52 products with a “Reef Safe” label, 48% of them contained a NOAA-specified “Reef Toxic” ingredient (Chi-Han 2020).

Further digging can reveal ingredients classified as non-hazardous (Miller 2021), but finding products containing only the listed ingredients can be difficult.

Even if you could find ingredients on the list provided in the Miller 2021 paper, that still does not mean that they are 100% reef and organism-safe. Chemicals affect different organisms in various ways, and currently, there is no standardized test that chemicals go through to determine if they are safe. The percentages of active ingredients differ from product to product, making classification more difficult. Is a 25% zinc oxide sunscreen better than a 4% BP-3 sunscreen? Without more research, these questions remain unanswered.

On sunscreen websites, the benefit to humans is frequently embellished and backed by dermatologists. Still, some scientific facts are stated without telling where they obtained their information (gowaxhead.com).

While there is still no clear answer about what sunscreen you should wear on your next outing, a few things are clear. More research is needed that should be performed by the companies that are advocating for their chemical use. Some sunscreens may be a better option such as non-nano zinc-oxide sunscreen, but overall, we must rethink sun protection and emphasize using material sun protection such as long-sleeved shirts, hats, and sunglasses.

(www.prevention.com)

References

BronzeTan.com. (2020, January 30). A Brief History of the Tan. Bronze Tan St. Louis. https://bronzetanstl.com/brief-history-tan/#:~:text=In%201923%20after%20accidentally%20tanning,and%20rebellions%20against%20Victorian%20values.

Chia-Han Yeh, M., Tsai, T. Y., & Huang, Y. C. (2020). Evaluation of ‘“reef safe”’ sunscreens: Labeling and cost implications for consumers. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 82(4), 1013–1015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2019.10.059

Downs, C. A., Kramarsky-Winter, E., Segal, R., Fauth, J., Knutson, S., Bronstein, O., Ciner, F. R., Jeger, R., Lichtenfeld, Y., Woodley, C. M., Pennington, P., Cadenas, K., Kushmaro, A., & Loya, Y. (2016). Toxicopathological Effects of the Sunscreen UV Filter, Oxybenzone (Benzophenone-3), on Coral Planulae and Cultured Primary Cells and Its Environmental Contamination in Hawaii and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 70(2), 265–288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00244-015-0227-7

Garcia, H. A., Hoffman, C. M., Kinney, K. A., & Lawler, D. F. (2011). Laccase-catalyzed oxidation of oxybenzone in municipal wastewater primary effluent. Water Research, 45(5), 1921–1932. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2010.12.027

Ghazipura, M., McGowan, R., Arslan, A., & Hossain, T. (2017). Exposure to benzophenone-3 and reproductive toxicity: A systematic review of human and animal studies. In Reproductive Toxicology (Vol. 73, pp. 175–183). Elsevier Inc. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reprotox.2017.08.015

Ilyas, H., & van Hullebusch, E. D. (2020). Performance comparison of different constructed wetlands designs for the removal of personal care products. In International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (Vol. 17, Issue 9). MDPI AG. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17093091

Lebaron, P. (2022). UV filters and their impact on marine life: state of the science, data gaps, and next steps. In Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (Vol. 36, Issue S6, pp. 22–28). John Wiley and Sons Inc. https://doi.org/10.1111/jdv.18198

Mao, F., He, Y., Kushmaro, A., & Gin, K. Y. H. (2017). Effects of benzophenone-3 on the green alga Chlamydomonas reinhardtii and the cyanobacterium Microcystis aeruginosa. Aquatic Toxicology, 193, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquatox.2017.09.029

Miller, I. B., Pawlowski, S., Kellermann, M. Y., Petersen-Thiery, M., Moeller, M., Nietzer, S., & Schupp, P. J. (2021). Toxic effects of UV filters from sunscreens on coral reefs revisited: regulatory aspects for “reef safe” products. Environmental Sciences Europe, 33(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12302-021-00515-w

Purohit , M. P. (Ed.). (2017, August 1). What type of sunscreen should I purchase?. DoveMed. https://www.dovemed.com/healthy-living/wellness-center/what-type-sunscreen-should-i-purchase

Urbach, F. (2001). The historical aspects of sunscreens. In Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology B: Biology (Vol. 64). www.elsevier.com/locate/jphotobiol

Watanabe, Y., Kojima, H., Takeuchi, S., Uramaru, N., Sanoh, S., Sugihara, K., Kitamura, S., & Ohta, S. (2015). Metabolism of UV-filter benzophenone-3 by rat and human liver microsomes and its effect on endocrine-disrupting activity. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 282(2), 119–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2014.12.002

Waxhead Sun Defense. (n.d.). Is zinc oxide safe? https://gowaxhead.com/blogs/the-thrive-lab/is-zinc-oxide-safe#:~:text=Zinc%20oxide%20is%20the%20only,and%20best%20active%20sunscreen%20ingredient.

Dive into Generosity: Moss Landing Marine Laboratories’ Day of Giving 2024

Hannah McGrath

Dive into Generosity: Moss Landing Marine Laboratories' Day of Giving 2024

By Hannah McGrath, MLML Oceanography Lab

Mark your calendars for the Moss Landing Marine Laboratories (MLML) Day of Giving on February 13th, 2024! As a renowned marine research facility and graduate program, MLML plays a pivotal role in advancing marine science and cultivating a passion for ocean conservation. The Day of Giving provides an incredible opportunity for supporters, alumni, and ocean enthusiasts to come together and support student scholarships, research and lab operations! 

Why Support MLML?

MLML has been a beacon of excellence in marine research for decades. Its interdisciplinary approach, cutting-edge research projects, and commitment to scientific outreach have made it a well known and respected institution. The funds raised during the Day of Giving will directly contribute to funding student research and opportunities including scientific diving equipment, boat time, laboratory equipment, and travel expenses to field sites and conferences (please watch the video attached to see where funds directly go). 

How Can You Contribute?

There are several ways for individuals to contribute to MLML community:

  • Monetary Donations: Contributions will go towards scholarships, research equipment, and maintaining MLML facilities.
  • Spread the Word: Share MLML Day of Giving information on social media platforms.  Encourage friends, family, and colleagues to join in supporting.
  • Engage with MLML: Attend our Open House on April 27th, 2024 from 9am - 5pm. This is a free, family-friendly event organized by MLML students and staff to engage with the surrounding community to showcase our research facilities, and share insights into marine science. 

Your support on the Day of Giving will have a lasting impact for students. It will provide scholarships for student research and equip MLML with the tools and resources needed to conduct research. 

Join the Day of Giving:

Mark your calendars for the Day of Giving on February 13th and the Open House on April 27th! Your generosity will significantly impact student research. 

Here is the link to  the Day of Giving page

Here is the link to the RSVP page: RSVP Form

 

Nature’s tiny heroes: how bacteria can devour plastic pollution in our oceans

Hannah McGrath

By Hannah McGrath, MLML Biological Oceanography Lab

Plastic pollution continues to be a growing issue on our planet, especially for our oceans. The global pandemic only contributed to our growing plastic problem. During the height of the pandemic, I remember walking along Riverside Park in New York City to escape my tiny apartment; the sidewalks and shorelines were littered with KN95 masks and light blue latex gloves. As I continued my walks throughout the pandemic, the sight of personal protective equipment scattered across the city became the norm. According to lead researcher Dr. Patrício Silva at the University of Aveiro, the pandemic dramatically increased the amount of plastic medical waste that has entered our aquatic systems. These plastics can then degrade into microplastics (< 5 mm in size) through physical, chemical, and biological processes which can have adverse effects on ecological and human health.

Although microplastics are small in size, they have a disproportionate effect on the environment. For instance, zooplankton which are important players in our ocean food webs and the biological carbon pump, a process that exports carbon to the deep sea, are threatened by microplastics. Zooplankton are able to consume microplastics which can damage their intestinal tracts, alter gene expression, delay growth, and impact feeding behavior resulting in decreased reproductive abilities according to lead scientist Dr. Meiting He at the College of Marine Sciences, South China Agricultural University. Unsurprisingly, microplastics have been identified in the gut content of organisms’ at almost all trophic levels from zooplankton to humans. Microplastics are in the clothing we wear, seafood we consume, beauty products we use, and more. In fact, in a 2019 study lead author Kieran Cox, a PhD candidate at the University of Victoria, estimated that ~39,000-52,000 pieces of microplastic are ingested by humans annually!

Illustration of microplastics (MPs) entering aquatic systems and being consumed by zooplankton resulting in the trophic-transfer of MPs up the food chain (He et al 2022). 

Not only is plastic pollution increasing but so is our need to adopt effective and sustainable ways for disposing plastics at a large scale. Current methods for plastic disposal are mismanaged and unsustainable. One common way to dispose of plastic is by incineration. However, during incineration plastics release carcinogens, dioxins, furans, heavy metals and sulfides into the environment states researchers Dr. Aubrey Chigwada and Dr. Memory Tekere at the University of South Africa. Another common method is dumping plastic waste into landfills but this causes plastic overflow affecting the biodiversity of the region. In addition, landfills store not only plastic waste but all types of waste that can decompose. During decomposition processes the potent greenhouse gas, methane, is released into the atmosphere which contributes to climate change. These landfills can also leak which can contaminate nearby groundwaters. Although recycling may seem like a promising way to dispose of plastics, at large scales it is too expensive and not feasible.

A more sustainable method to dispose of plastic is using microorganisms like bacteria that can biodegrade plastics. The first study that investigated microplastic degradation by microorganisms was Dr. Cacciari and his colleagues from the University of Tuscia in 1993. The researchers used the bacteria Pseudomonas and Vibrio to degrade polypropylene. Since 1993, many researchers have studied biodegradation of various plastics using bacteria from around the globe. Bacteria naturally exist in various environments from cow dung to human eyelashes to hot springs to polar ice caps making them suitable candidates for degrading microplastics. For instance, lead author Jun Yang at Beihang University, Beijing found two bacterial strains isolated from the gut of Indian mealmoths that were able to consume the plastic polyethylene.

Image of the two bacterial strains, Enterobacter asburiae and Bacillus sp. isolated from the gut of Indian meal moths (Yang et al. 2014).

Not only can bacteria naturally degrade plastics, but they can also be geoengineered to remove plastic from our oceans. Bacteria may just be nature's tiny heroes to combat plastic pollution. Currently, Professor Song Lin Chua and his colleagues at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University (PolyU) have bioengineered the bacteria Pseudomonas aeruginosa to remove microplastics from the environment. The researchers plan to use the sticky nature of bacteria to create “tape-like microbe nets” to capture microplastics. These microbial nets filled with microplastics then sink to the bottom of the water column. The bacteria’s biofilm dispersal gene is then engineered to release these microplastics from the biofilm traps. The bulk microplastics then float to the surface and are recycled. These preliminary experiments have been successful but have not been conducted outside of a controlled setting.

 

Schematic illustration of the bioengineered bacteria, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, removing microplastics from the water column using the 'capture-and-release' method developed by researchers at Hong Kong Polytechnic University

Although scientists are developing innovative ways to remove plastics from our ocean, there have been concerns about using bacteria to do this. Engineering bacteria to break down plastics especially in hot spots like the Pacific Garbage patch may reduce plastic waste, but may also have unintended consequences. For instance, breaking down microplastics may increase microplastic ingestion by other marine organisms like zooplankton that are known to consume microplastics. Another drawback is that the bacteria aeruginosa, that was used in PolyU preliminary experiments, carries diseases for humans’ states Professor Chua. Researchers are still searching for a bacterium that could be engineered that is natural and safe to humans at a large scale. But I am hopeful that scientists will find a safe and suitable candidate since bacteria are extremely abundant in the ocean. For every 1 ml of seawater there are ~1 million bacteria!

The reality is plastic pollution in the ocean is rapidly increasing. It is imperative that we find a solution to our growing plastic pollution problem sooner than later. Bacteria may just be one solution to our global plastic problem. However, more research and experimentation are still needed to understand the true benefits and consequences of genetically engineering bacteria to remove plastic from our oceans. Will bacteria be able to solve our plastic pollution problem?

 

References

Cacciari, I., Quatrini, P., Zirletta, G., Mincione, E., Vinciguerra, V., Lupattelli, P., Giovannozzi Sermanni, G., 1993. Isotactic polypropylene biodegradation by a microbial community: physicochemical characterization of metabolites produced. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 59, 3695–3700. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.59.11.3695-3700.1993

Chigwada, A.D., Tekere, M., 2023. The plastic and microplastic waste menace and bacterial biodegradation for sustainable environmental clean-up a review. Environ. Res. 231, 116110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2023.116110

Cox, K.D., Covernton, G.A., Davies, H.L., Dower, J.F., Juanes, F., Dudas, S.E., 2020. Correction to human consumption of microplastics. Environ. Sci. Technol. 54, 10974–10974. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.0c04032

He, M., Yan, M., Chen, X., Wang, X., Gong, H., Wang, W., Wang, J., 2022. Bioavailability and toxicity of microplastics to zooplankton. Gondwana Res. 108, 120–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2021.07.021

Liu, S.Y., Leung, M.M.-L., Fang, J.K.-H., Chua, S.L., 2021. Engineering a microbial ‘trap and release’ mechanism for microplastics removal. Chem. Eng. J. 404, 127079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2020.127079

Patrício Silva, A.L., Prata, J.C., Walker, T.R., Duarte, A.C., Ouyang, W., Barcelò, D., Rocha-Santos, T., 2021. Increased plastic pollution due to COVID-19 pandemic: Challenges and recommendations. Chem. Eng. J. 405, 126683. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2020.126683

Yang, J., Yang, Y., Wu, W.-M., Zhao, J., Jiang, L., 2014. Evidence of polyethylene biodegradation by bacterial strains from the guts of plastic-eating waxworms. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 13776–13784. https://doi.org/10.1021/es504038a

 

 

“Wait, you still eat fish?” and other things marine science students are tired of hearing

Keenan Guillas

by Grace Teranishi, MLML Ichthyology Lab

 

As marine scientists and scientists-in-training, we at MLML know we dodged a bullet in the decision against pursuing a career in, say, medicine—a path that inevitably leads to a hypochondriacal aunt listing her symptoms to you at the Thanksgiving table or to a patient of yours asking about his unfortunate toe rash when he spots you at self-checkout. Aren't you also glad you didn't major in studio art, which would have everyone and their mother wanting to hire you to illustrate a children’s book? Yes, we fish people, sponge people, seaweed connoisseurs, and sediment transport enthusiasts have it pretty good, but there are still a few comments and interactions we would prefer not to put up with on a day-to-day basis.

I asked MLML students, "What are you tired of people telling you because they know you are in the marine science field?" Here's what you had to say:

 

Some of you were frustrated that people underestimate the work you do.

1. "What an easy job/degree. You’re so lucky just hanging out at the beach all day." -Dylan, Ichthyology

 

Photo of beach waves at sunset
Credit: Grace Teranishi

 

Others of you have experienced that people vastly overestimate what you can do. 

2. "'Oh you're a marine scientist, you're going to save the world.'

–there's literally no paper I could publish that would suddenly make people take environmentalism more seriously. The change has to come from policy. Also, assuming that the tanks in the [Monterey Bay Aquarium’s] deep sea exhibit are pressurized. They're not." -Alex, Invertebrate Ecology

 

3. "Oh, so you're going to save the coral reefs, right?" -Keenan, Invertebrate Ecology

 

We would love to reverse centuries of environmental exploitation with a snap of our fingers, but unfortunately, that’s not how it works.

 

 

Some expressed fatigue at general ignorance.

4. "Challenging if the megalodon is truly extinct because we've only explored 30% of our oceans." -Sophie, Marine Biology major at SJSU

 

We love a good bad shark movie now and then, but please stop.

 

 

Or fatigue at the nonstop questions not even remotely related to what you actually study.

5. "This one time during a dinner rush I was serving a large table and they asked me if I was in school. Upon finding out I was at MLML, one patron asked me to enlighten the table about the local ecology of the bay. 'Tell us about the canyon!' he said. 'Tell them about the whales!' he said. 'Twas dinner and a show... we were very busy... and I study fish genes." -Nick, Ichthyology

 

6. "I participate in Skype-a-Scientist, where you match with classrooms to talk about your experiences as a researcher. I introduced myself as a student at the Marine Labs with a focus on fish/estuaries/ocean life; I matched with an elementary school teacher who wanted me to answer an eight year-old's questions about platypuses." -Grace, Ichthyology

 

7. "So do you like, train dolphins?" -Jackie, Fisheries & Conservation Biology

 

8. "When you type 'phycology' into a google search and get asked if you really mean 'psychology.'" -Shelby, Phycology

 

9. "What kind of fish is this?" "How long can whales hold their breath for?" "Does toilet bowl water really go down counter-clockwise?" -Victoria, Geological Oceanography 

Photo of black and yellow rockfish and purple sea urchins
Credit: Juliana Cornett

 

People just really love hearing all about the sharks.

10. "It has to be 'Have you ever seen sharks?' when I talk about diving or am spotted with dive gear at a beach.  Sometimes it is difficult to talk about them in a realistic, non-threatening way." -Kameron, Ichthyology

 

11. "Did you hear about the shark attack at [location]? What do you think happened?" -Matt, Phycology

 

Many of you were tired of talking to people about Monterey Bay sea otters and felt that the less charismatic ocean life deserved a little more love.

12. "*Looks at an invertebrate* ‘Wait, but they're not alive though right?'" -Noah, Invertebrate Ecology

 

13. "They always want to talk about sea otters and why they are so important here." -Amber, Vertebrate Ecology

 

14. "I'm tired of people thinking I study fish or mammals... or when people mention how their cousin studied marine biology in undergrad but now she's a *insert random unrelated profession*" -Jess, Phycology

 

There’s more to the ocean than whales and dolphins and otters, people!

Close-up photo of opalescent nudibranch
Credit: Juliana Cornett

 

And on a similar note, marine science encompasses so much more than just biology.

15."People asking what the difference [is] between marine science and marine biology" -Samuel, Ichthyology

 

16. "So you're a marine biologist?"' -Anonymous

 

17. "Everyone assumes I'm a 'marine biologist' when I tell them I'm an oceanographer :-)" -Marine, Chemical Oceanography

Photo of researchers performing a CTD (conductivity, temperature, depth) cast at sea
Credit: Grace Teranishi

 

We are also not all out there telling everyone to stop eating fish. Sometimes it’s quite the opposite! We want to make sure that there’s still fish left in the ocean so we can keep eating them.

18. "Oh so fish science? Wait, do you still eat fish?" -Quinn, Ichthyology

 

19. "I study vertebrate ecology. People usually assume that I am extremely against all forms of fishing. I have a lot of respect for fishermen and want to help them as much as I want to protect endangered marine mammals and turtles."-Kali, Vertebrate Ecology

 

20. “If I eat fish and then [they] get surprised that I do. Of course I do they're delicious." -Konnor, Fisheries & Conservation Biology

 

Currently thinking about the trout I had for dinner last night.

Photo of cooked trout dinner
Credit: Nicholas Kolasa-Lenarz

 

 

And finally, this:

21. "'You will be paid in experience!' -with regard to any unpaid internship 'opportunity'" -Anonymous, Geological Oceanography

 

Thank you everyone for taking the time to respond to this survey!

MLML Climate Collective (MCC): Addressing the climate crisis with collective action

Keenan Guillas

by Taylor Azizeh and Basil Darby, MLML Vertebrate Ecology Lab and MLML Physical Oceanography Lab

These days, “climate change” seems like a buzzword in many settings. However, the rapid and devastating effects of an anthropogenically-shifting climate are at the forefront of scientists’ minds at Moss Landing Marine Laboratories (MLML). Underneath the brilliant science happening in our small community and amidst administrative bureaucracy, there is a stormy, ominous cloud hanging over our heads, echoing the same collective thought: What are we going to do about climate change?

As we write this in early September 2022, California is experiencing one of the most extreme heat waves ever recorded in the western United States at this time of year. On the other side of the world, after months of endless monsoons which have resulted in ten times the average rainfall, over one-third of Pakistan is underwater, with massive floods displacing millions of people. Pakistan contributes only 0.6% of global CO2 but is facing devastating repercussions. This is becoming an all-too-familiar story for most of the global south. 

It’s undeniable that excess carbon dioxide produced by humans through industry, energy production, transportation, and more is affecting the entire planet in innumerable ways, including via heat waves. To quote the United Nations (UN) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC):

“It is unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land. Widespread and rapid changes in the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere and biosphere have occurred.” [1]

The world’s oceans, which cover 70% of the Earth, have acted as a massive carbon sink by absorbing 90% of the excess heat produced by increased carbon emissions [1]. Studying the ocean’s role in global systems is an overarching objective of researchers at MLML. We are a consortium institution that was founded in a spirit of collaboration across CSU campuses and disciplines, with the goal of “advancing marine science, serving society, and transforming public discourse and policy towards sustainable human interaction with the world.”

As such, researchers here cover an incredibly wide range of topics. For the most part, we are acutely interested in how climate change affects marine systems, ranging from mammals to invertebrates to large-scale oceanographic processes (for examples of this, see Table 1).

Table 1. Examples in the literature of how climate change can affect the eight main faculty research groups at MLML.
Lab Sources
Biological Oceanography Gradinger (1996), Thompson et al. (2015)
Chemical Oceanography Altieri & Gedan (2014), Hoegh-Guldberg et al.(2007)
Geological Oceanography Hunt et al. (2013), Trenhaile et al. (2010)
Ichthyology Lab Genner et al. (2010), Pörtner et al. (2007)
Invertebrate Ecology Byrne et al. (2020), Reddin et al. (2020)
Phycology Lab Assis et al. (2018), Krumhansel et al. (2013)
Physical Oceanography Bakun et al. (1990), van Leeuwen et al. (2022), 
Vertebrate Ecology Kovacs & Lydersen (2008), Forcada & Trathan (2009)
It’s happening now… and it’s serious

The negative effects of anthropogenic climate change are innumerable and could range from food shortages and an increased risk of disease to all-out wars over water rights and access (see the IPCC report [1] for a more complete list). It has also been shown that human impacts are causing what is known as the sixth mass extinction [3]. It’s impossible to overstate the implications resulting from this, especially if we continue along the same trajectory of emissions (Figure 1).

The U.S. economy is projected to lose between about 1% to 4% of its gross domestic product (GDP) annually by 2100 through shifts in mortality, labor, production, agriculture, crime, and coastal storms under a high emissions scenario. The question, therefore, is not “How can we afford to implement solutions?”, but rather: How can we afford not to?

“Accelerated and equitable climate action in mitigating, and adapting to, climate change impacts is critical to sustainable development.” [2]

Figure 1. Projections of temperature into the future given different emission scenarios. Source: IPCC (2021), Credit: Jenessa Duncombe

One of the first steps in addressing a problem is identifying the root cause. The individual is not to blame. There have been many examples of how companies like Exxon Mobil influence policy by lobbying politicians, producing disinformation campaigns, and actively preventing solutions. And considering US taxpayers are subsidizing the fossil fuel industry with about $20.5 billion per year, one could argue that these companies have been extremely successful. 

A collaborative and collective effort of communities is a powerful tool that we have at our disposal. We must utilize it if we have any chance at addressing these threats to human civilization and our global ecosystem. As daunting as it is to stand up to large corporations, the power really is with the people. Once enough people recognize this, we can start to take steps to enact change.

Moss Landing Marine Labs Climate Collective (MCC)

The brunt of climate impacts will be felt locally at first – which is the most important place we can enact change. Many local governments already have action plans which include reductions in CO2 targets and other measures. Many scientists aim to produce objective, accessible science and aren’t always ready to get involved by making political statements. However, the Moss Landing Marine Labs Climate Collective (MCC) believes that it is no longer just a political issue. We believe that politics, social justice, and science are intimately intertwined (Figure 2). Therefore, we seek to facilitate discussions, increase collaborative learning and research, and push for climate solutions and action plans.

Figure 2. An illustration (IPCC 2022) of the interconnection of climate science, environmental impacts, and subsequent human actions

Combating the climate crisis while doing thesis work, completing coursework, and working potentially 1-3 jobs may seem like an overwhelming or impossible task. Even if you are not a graduate student, working in the job force while slowly seeing the climate crisis unfold can make you feel powerless. But working towards climate action is possible and it must be done. The U.S. is the second-largest producer of greenhouse gas emissions, and this being a global issue means that we are all under an obligation to give what time and energy we can to this.

If we share the burden together, the weight on our shoulders will feel so much lighter. 

What does it mean to you to be part of the Moss Landing Marine Labs community when faced with such an existential threat to human civilization?

It means coming together to face these problems head-on. Everything from advocating divestment from fossil fuels to making local initiatives more accessible to the Moss Landing community. Solutions to the climate crisis need to also address complex issues like race, class, gender, and sexuality.

MCC Mission Statement:

“We are a collective of students from the Moss Landing Marine Laboratory CSU consortium that strives to advocate for the implementation of sustainable university and community-wide practices. We believe that politics, social justice, and science are intimately intertwined, and therefore we created the MLML Climate Collective (MCC) which aims to support action towards combating causes of anthropogenically-driven climate change through tangible measures, such as:

  • Obtaining comprehensive carbon neutrality plans (without carbon offsets) with a detailed timeline from home campuses
  • Creating a dialogue about university divestment in fossil fuels
  • Identifying and implementing sustainable campus living measures, including power generation and conservation, responsible recycling (e.g. food, clothes, electronics), and campus water management
  • Recognition of intersectionality (i.e. class, gender, race, sexuality, etc.) in climate response
  • Providing a safe space and inclusive environment to openly discuss climate issues and ways to support the MLML community”

These next couple of decades will be a challenge for everyone, so we kindly invite you to join us in the MLML Climate Collective. If you are interested in being involved please contact us.

 

References

[1] IPCC, 2022: Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, B. Rama (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press. In press.

[2] IPCC, 2022: Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, R. Slade, A. Al Khourdajie, R. van Diemen, D. McCollum, M. Pathak, S. Some, P. Vyas, R. Fradera, M. Belkacemi, A. Hasija, G. Lisboa, S. Luz, J. Malley, (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA. doi: 10.1017/9781009157926

[3] Ceballos, Gerardo, Paul R Ehrlich, and Rodolfo Dirzo. “Biological Annihilation via the Ongoing Sixth Mass Extinction Signaled by Vertebrate Population Losses and Declines.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS 114.30 (2017): E6089–E6096.

Gradinger, R. (1995). Climate Change and Biological Oceanography of the Arctic Ocean. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 352(1699), 277–286. doi:10.1098/rsta.1995.0070 

Thompson, Peter A. et al. “Climate Variability Drives Plankton Community Composition Changes: The 2010–2011 El Niño to La Niña Transition Around Australia.” Journal of Plankton Research 37.5 (2015): 966–984.

Altieri, AH, and KB Gedan. “Climate Change and Dead Zones.” Global Change Biology 21.4 (2015): 1395–1406.

Hoegh-Guldberg, O et al. “Coral Reefs Under Rapid Climate Change and Ocean Acidification.” Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science) 318.5857 (2007): 1737–1742. 

Hunt, James E. et al. “Frequency and Timing of Landslide-Triggered Turbidity Currents Within the Agadir Basin, Offshore NW Africa: Are There Associations with Climate Change, Sea Level Change and Slope Sedimentation Rates?” Marine Geology 346 (2013): 274–291.

Trenhaile, Alan S. “Modeling Cohesive Clay Coast Evolution and Response to Climate Change.” Marine Geology 277.1 (2010): 11–20.

Genner, Martin J. et al. “Body Size-Dependent Responses of a Marine Fish Assemblage to Climate Change and Fishing over a Century-Long Scale.” Global Change Biology 16.2 (2010): 517–527.

Pörtner, Hans O, and Rainer Knust. “Climate Change Affects Marine Fishes Through the Oxygen Limitation of Thermal Tolerance.” Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science) 315.5808 (2007): 95–97.

Byrne, Maria et al. “Limitations of Cross— and Multigenerational Plasticity for Marine Invertebrates Faced with Global Climate Change.” Global Change Biology 26.1 (2020): 80–102.

Reddin, Carl J., Ádám T. Kocsis, and Wolfgang Kiessling. “Marine Invertebrate Migrations Trace Climate Change over 450 Million Years.” Global Ecology and Biogeography 29.7 (2020): 1280–1282.

Assis, Jorge, Miguel B. Araújo, and Ester A. Serrão. “Projected Climate Changes Threaten Ancient Refugia of Kelp Forests in the North Atlantic.” Global Change Biology 24.1 (2018): e55–e66.

Krumhansl, Kira A, Jean-Sébastien Lauzon-Guay, and Robert E Scheibling. “Modeling Effects of Climate Change and Phase Shifts on Detrital Production of a Kelp Bed.” Ecology (Durham) 95.3 (2014): 763–774. Web.

Bakun, A. “Global Climate Change and Intensification of Coastal Ocean Upwelling.” Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science) 247.4939 (1990): 198–201.

van Leeuwen, SM et al. “The Mediterranean Rhodes Gyre: Modelled Impacts of Climate Change, Acidification and Fishing.” Marine Ecology Progress Series (Halstenbek) 690 (2022): 31–50. Web.

Kovacs, Kit M, and Christian Lydersen. “Climate Change Impacts on Seals and Whales in the North Atlantic Arctic and Adjacent Shelf Seas.” Science Progress (1916) 91.2 (2008): 117–150. Web.

Forcada, Jaume, and Trathan, PN. “Penguin Responses to Climate Change in the Southern Ocean.” Global Change Biology 15.7 (2009): 1618–1630. Web.

Crippa, M., Guizzardi, D., Solazzo, E., Muntean, M., Schaaf, E., Monforti-Ferrario, F., Banja, M., Olivier, J.G.J., Grassi, G., Rossi, S., Vignati, E.,GHG emissions of all world countries - 2021 Report, EUR 30831 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2021, ISBN 978-92-76-41547-3, doi:10.2760/173513, JRC126363

Does science have market value? Understanding the influence of science on the economy

Keenan Guillas

by Jason Gonsalves, MLML Physical Oceanography Lab

 

Eco-consciousness at first seems like an individual choice without wider implications. Working with Green Seal this past summer revealed the attachment of this behavior to anentire market through a process called ecolabeling. Green Seal generates “rigorous standards for health, sustainability and product performance” that aim to drive “permanent shifts in the marketplace, empowering better purchasing decisions and rewarding industry innovators.” As an intern in the Science & Standards Department with Green Seal, I witnessed both how widespread these labels are, and how companies concern themselves with being portrayed as ‘environmentally friendly’, so much so that they’d pay to be certified by ecolabeling nonprofits like Green Seal. At a moment where conservation of the environment is increasingly more popular and desired, I began to wonder about how valuable science (and by extension conservation) is to the economy.

A 2020 report from Gutleber states that “science and technology underpin much of the advance of human welfare and the long-term progress of our civilization.” The focus of Gutleber’s report is on the efficacy of investing in particle physics, noting “large-scale instruments can also offer positive returns for the economy and society as well as many opportunities for industry and enable co-innovation through international collaboration.” However, these benefits could be extended to other scientific operations as innovation expands in other disciplines. Has the expansion of science into the mainstream world created market value for scientific interpretation?

Does scientific advancement generate revenue?

Globally, there are research initiatives that are contributing considerable economic growth. Examples of this are organizations like the National Institute of Health (NIH), which generates $2.21 in additional economic output for every $1 spent on biomedical innovation. In Australia, government analysts released a report in 2015 recognizing around $145 billion a year in revenue from innovation in science and research.

While preliminary costs are often times large, studies have shown investment into public research yields a high rate of return through scientific breakthroughs. Source: Rising Above the Gathering Storm (National Academies, 2006)

Other than direct production from research endeavors, improvements in scientific fields have led to the preservation of assets in world resources. A 2015 World Wildlife Fund (WWF) report estimated ocean assets (i.e. fishing, aquaculture, tourism, education, shipping) totalling over $24 trillion in value. Anthropogenic effects like habitat destruction, pollution, overfishing and climate change have begun to chip away at that value. Advances in ocean sustainability, coastal management and new technology are crucial to maintaining the value of critical resources like the ocean.

The business perspective on science

Investment into scientific innovation is clearly profitable, and the numbers show that the corporate world should build this into their framework. However, over the past 30 years, there has been a considerable decline in corporate R&D on basic research concepts as opposed to late stage development. A National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) 2015 report found that companies are still patenting new products, but those patents are being acquired from other places.

Combined internal and acquired publications and patents for science and technology, showing a clear downward trend in internal company R&D. Source: Arora et. al (2015)

It seems corporations have become more interested in the products of science as opposed to scientific applicability. Large-scale R&D has been beneficial to society, but there is a possibility that it is not commercially viable. Looking at it from a business perspective, the biggest obstacle is the viability for shareholder returns. It’s clearly imperative that not only the United States, but the world not lose sight of the importance in advancing scientific discovery. How do we pitch investing in science more effectively to corporations?

Reinvigorating the corporate conversation on scientific innovation

The same Australian study concludes that in societies with an ‘advanced’ economy (i.e., a high standard of living), science underpinned 10-15% of economic activity. In order for continued economic growth, the logical undertone would be that science and technology will require further development. To return to an age of rapid scientific progress and innovation, the conversation must be approached from both an academic and economic standpoint.

Academia has long been considered an ‘ivory tower,’ and accessibility to information from non-scientists has been difficult for a number of years. This mentality created a gap in trust and accountability between the public and scientists, but recent data shows that could be changing. Pew Research Center’s 2020 polling data shows that 73% of Americans believe science has positively impacted society, and 82% expect future developments to also be impactful. Public confidence in scientists has also increased, the same data noting 35% of Americans fully trust scientists (up from 29% in 2016) and 51% have a fair amount of trust for scientists.

There is still more work to be done about the transparency of science, however, with that same 2020 polling data showing two-in-ten or fewer Americans don’t believe scientists are transparent about their conflicts of interest, and less than two-in-ten Americans believe scientists admit and take responsibility for their mistakes. This seems to be remedied in the study, with 57% of Americans saying they trust scientists more when data is publicly available.

Solving the divide between the public and the scientific community should restore scientific advancement to the forefront of social and economic development. Only time will tell if the efforts scientists are currently making will be enough to shorten that gap.

Fourteen students defend thesis research in 2021!

Emily Montgomery

By Emily Montgomery, MLML Phycology Lab

2021 was a complex year to be a graduate student, with global societal issues demanding our attention and energy alongside our usual scientific workload. The emergence of the COVID-19 vaccines brought with it the hope of being able to safely socialize in-person with our friends and loved ones again. The resilient Moss community was able to return to some in-person activities in the Fall of 2021, including hosting the first lab Halloween party since 2019!

During this rollercoaster of a year, 14 students successfully defended their MLML theses virtually via Zoom. Please join me in congratulating the following students:

  • Ann Bishop, Phycology Lab
  • Taylor Eddy, Invertebrate Zoology Lab
  • Bonnie Brown, Fisheries and Conservation Biology Lab
  • Matthew Jew, Ichthyology Lab
  • Justin Cordova, Pacific Shark Research Center
  • Gregory Bongey, Geological Oceanography Lab
  • Jennifer Tackaberry, Vertebrate Ecology Lab
  • Sophie Bernstein, Ichthyology Lab
  • Rachel Brooks, Ichthyology Lab
  • Holly Doerr, Ichthyology Lab
  • Melissa Naugle, Invertebrate Ecology Lab
  • Kristen Saksa, Ichthyology Lab
  • Jacquie Chisholm, Physical Oceanography Lab
  • Amanda Camarato, Physical Oceanography Lab

Read below for pictures of the graduates, and explore the links to their thesis announcement posts with more info about their projects and the YouTube recordings of their defenses.

Check out posts commemorating past defenders written by MLML alumna June Shrestha: 2020, 2019, 2018, and 2017.

Read More

Our Supercharge Experience: The Logan Lab

Lauren Cooley

By Arie Dash, CSUMB Logan Lab

 

The Logan Lab is the Marine Environmental Physiology Lab at California State University, Monterey Bay (CSUMB). We are a mix of graduate and undergraduate students under the guidance of Dr. Cheryl Logan, and we’re focused on evaluating the physiological responses of marine fish and invertebrates to the current and predicted effects of climate change. Many of our projects rely on analyzing large environmental, physiological, or genomic datasets but most of us do not have formal training in data science.

Over time, we’ve developed several shared workflows, but our code, documentation, and data management practices have not always been optimal. Luckily, this challenge is not unique to our lab and we decided to undertake Openscapes’ 10-week Supercharge plan during the 2020 Fall semester to learn more about current open science best practices. We dedicated a number of our regularly scheduled weekly lab meetings to the Openscapes modules with different combinations of students taking the lead each time.

While we didn’t fully finish the 10-week plan, we made good progress in several areas. At the individual level, most of us started using GitHub to work collaboratively (no more emailing code back and forth!) and started intentionally organizing our files so that others, including our future selves, can more easily use them. We also found that collectively learning about the techniques was helpful when approaching concepts we weren’t familiar with, and as a result, our coding ability has increased tremendously!

The Logan Lab at California State University Monterey Bay (CSUMB)

As a lab, we wrote a formal code of conduct and created a lab-wide Github page. Most of our sessions were heavily discussion based, which was very helpful for getting everyone up to the same speed and learning about the topics, but we lacked time to actually implement all that we learned. As a result, while many of us made individual progress, most of the lab-wide goals like a shared GitHub page and a formalized onboarding and offboarding process still have work to be done.

In the current 2-month Champions Program, we are excited to learn more advanced techniques for what we’ve already implemented, discuss data management approaches with different CSU labs, and collaboratively implement more open science best practices. This will be an ongoing process, but we hope that by the end of the workshop we will be able to work more efficiently and collaboratively, and that we can further our lab goal of fostering a supportive and inclusive community approach to open science.

Happy World Oceans Day!

Kali Prescott

By Kali Prescott, Vertebrate Ecology Lab

A day near and dear to everyone here at MLML. Here is a brief history on World Ocean Day and a link to the website!

World Ocean Day was first proposed by Canada in 1992 at the Earth Summit; however, it wasn't until 2002 that a multi-national effort began to organize World Ocean Day as a global day of action. In it's first year (2003), World Ocean Day saw 25 events organized in 15 countries. 16 years later in 2019 over 140 countries organized over 2000 events in support of ocean conservation and awareness. Although the covid-19 pandemic nixed in person events, over 454 million people engaged with World Ocean Day during June of 2020. See https://worldoceanday.org/ for more info.

For us here a MLML, World Ocean Day means more visibility and more opportunities to share our research with our communities. We'd love to see what our MLML community is up to so share your research on social media!

P.S. Don't forget to tell your friends that the MLML Open House Crowdfunding Campaign is LIVE! Make sure they know to get their hands on this years Open House T-shirt design below!

 

Dissonance in science communication: Taking an evidence-based approach to discussing climate science

Lauren Cooley

By Jason Gonsalves, MLML Physical Oceanography Lab

 

You don’t have to be actively involved in the larger national discussion to know that climate change is an increasingly sensitive topic, even in 2021. As unbelievable as it may sound, the chances of someone in your social circle not being under the impression that global warming is happening are shockingly high. In a 2020 survey, an estimated 72% of Americans think global warming is happening right now. When adjusting to a more specific question, that same survey showed that only 57% of Americans believe global warming is occurring as a result of human activities.

Read More