Deaf Fish??!!

[archerfish 685]

See:http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/breaking-news/fish-are-turning-deaf-from-acidic-seawater-british-researchers-claim/story-e6frea73-1226067446473I guess the lure manufacturers won't need to be including "rattles" in their HB lures any longer.Will fish need to be fitted with "herring aids"? Cheersaf

[breambo25 1]

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

[Woody 0]

lol, "Herring Aids" love it.

[kon 300]

Now I am really confused...but perhaps Cate et al can put me right?All other things being equal, the solubility of CO2 in water decreases as the temperature increases.We are told the oceans are warming - well, not according to the ARGO buoy system deployed a few years ago...We are told that the oceans are acidifying - well, a matter of degree, if one talks about a specific latitude range over a specific period...Now - both would happen simultaneously...because...?I also note;"Researchers reared baby clownfish in water with the levels of CO2 predicted by the UN over the next 100 years and tested their responses after around 20 days." Oh, poor Nemo...anyone else detect just a tad of anthropomorphic propaganda there?

[twinpower 151]

i would think fish would feel the vibes not hear em but who knows lol dont wana sound like a know it all haha cheers tp

[sbarnden 397]

Kon,When calibrated correctly for sea level variation and examined over historical periods the ARGO bouy system shows warming exactly as expected. The claims that it is cooling were throughly disproved as cherry picking of the data from poorly calibrated data sets.Levitus 2009CO2 solubility does decrease at the oceans warm. Thats one of the worrying things since it means the oceans will reduce the amount of CO2 it is currently absorbing from the atmosphere (it currently absorbs around half of all human emission).The directly measured ocean acidification exactly in line with increasing atmospheric CO2 that demonstrate that human emissions are directly driving observed oceanic acidification.Ocean Acidification: A Critical Emerging Problem for the Ocean SciencesIt is especially worrying as atmospheric CO2 levels are still out of balance with dissolved CO2 levels so there is still more acidification to occur as it slowly moves into equilibrium with atmospheric CO2 and dissolved CO2.They have also done studies on slightly less cuddly creatures. Such as shellfish in CO2 levels projected (not predicted, projections carry forward current trends, not make guesses on where future things will be). The results are not nice and indicate that the very base creatures on the food chain will be hit hard as they struggle to make their calcium carbonate shells which they use to protect themselves.Impact of elevated CO2 on shellfish calcification

[kon 300]

sbarnden...where to start...I am sooo over people quoting papers at each other on both warmist and sceptic websites (yes, I did at the very least read the abstracts if not the papers until I got sick of it - and woke up to the SZ thing last year) and the conclusion I have come to is that, to say the least, the science is far from settled.Without turning this thread or site into yet another pro/anti AGW discussion vehicle, I have seen posters in other fora address some of the points you have made by quoting papers presenting contrary opinions. Lots of "he said, she said". I don`t get paid to do this, so you will have to excuse me for not quoting papers by link, nor are there enough hours in the day for me to do so...I recall a poster elsewhere countering the ARGO warming indications with a response to the effect that the calibration adjustments have been called into question by another scientist.Cherry picking swings both ways.Poorly calibrated datasets - whoa, let he who is without sin etc...I have seen the "oceans absorbing half of all human emissions" thing both supported and debunked, there are atmospheric CO2 residency period considerations and controversy, non-oceanic carbon sink issues, purported oceanic CO2 outgassing is in the mix as well, there is even argument over isotopic signatures for goodness` sake!Atmospheric vs dissolved levels of CO2 in relation to future modelled changes also rings a bell as a limited parameter modelling consideration.You speak of projections, would you care to "project" the last 12-13 year GMT record trend?And is it not trumpeted IPCC "projections", to use your definition, that we are currently and incessantly being bombarded with, almost daily? (Shhh, don`t use the "modelling" word)I suspect we will have to agree to disagree, but what really scares me is that I have seen so many parallels between the AGW and MP SZ sagas - not least of which is the indignant and self-righteous proponents resorting to "scientific consensus" and literally Goebbels-esque tactics to browbeat the lowly, ignorant and misled "denier" rabble.I am cynically over the AGW thing, but I am very concerned that the same signals have appeared in our more cloistered area of interest.

[sirwaxxalot 1]

"herring aids"?

terrible

[Mango 0]

I found the article a little confusing until i got to the nitty gritty science reference...it all made so much more sense...'Finding Nemo'.....what more credibility does an article require!!??....and so accuratly targetted at the readers' demographic...

[archerfish 685]

Not only deafness - now the poor buggers have something else to contend with:http://m.smh.com.au/environment/conservation/reef-fish-face-new-climate-threat-20110601-1fg6e.html

[kon 300]

afIt`s not exactly "breaking news" http://oceanacidification.wordpress.com/2009/02/03/nemo-could-get-lost-in-acidifying-seawater/#more-1356Wonder why it`s again being rehashed, right now...a clue, Jools? Swanny? Greg? :whistle:

[archerfish 685]

Well spotted, kon...

[kon 300]

afYou are gonna love this!http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/03/20/0808007106.abstract#aff-3 Nemo doesn`t need to worry about climate change - because No-take MPAs will help protect him from ocean acidification by increasing his chances of survival through enhanced SZ-to-SZ larval recruitment.No probs. As we are constantly being told, one of the benefits of Sanctuary Zones will be to mitigate against the effects of climate change. Perfect case in point. Brethren, I have seen the light... :evil:

[kon 300]

With a little bit of digging this just keeps getting better!From wiki"Clownfish are now reared in captivity by a handful of marine ornamental farms in the USA. Clownfish were the first species of Saltwater fish to successfully be Tank-raised. Tank-raised fish are a better choice for aquarist, because wild-caught fish are more likely to die soon after purchasing them due to the stress of capture and shipping. Also, tank-bred fish are usually more disease resistant and in general are less affected by stress when introduced to the aquarium. Captive bred clownfishes may not have the same instinctual behavior to live in an anemone. They may have to be coaxed into finding the anemone by the home aquarist. Even then, there is no guarantee that the anemone will host the clownfish."Of relevance to both the older "smell" study referred to in the last few posts above and the very recently publicised new "hearing" study;- James Cook bred (still breed?) their own clownfish in pH-unmanipulated seawater, fair `nuff- The recent hearing study subjected them to pH "atmospheric CO2 equivalents" of 600, 700 and 900 parts per million (currently it is 390-ish)- These atmospheric CO2 contents are modelled projections based on various IPCC scenarios for 2050 - 2100- Over a matter of weeks the fish were, without the benefit of longer-term adaptation, subjected to a pH change projected to occur over a 50-100 year periodYou couldn`t make this stuff up...well, actually it seems you can...

[afishyfish 4]

Will fish need to be fitted with "herring aids"? Cheersaf

Speak up af I cant hear u :pinch:

[ecofreak 0]

You will have to excuse my ability to understand marine fish deafness, I am clearly retarded. When did fish other than cephlapods grow ears, all skin and scale fish hear via vibrations that are picked up by a lateral line and flow through to the nerve endings in the spine that relay a message to the brain. The effects of CO2 in the water can not alter this. In saying that, fish of any species that are hand reared do not learn what a predatory fish is because they do not see them, any synthetic tests of vibration or activity in the water will only reflect learned behavior, nothing more nothing less. If however they put a mangrove jack in the heightened levels of CO2 water with the clown fish they would soon learn what is friend and what is foe as they would watch their friends being eaten, they would therefore learn when mr mangrove jack is around I must hide. Instead they synthetically replicate the sound/vibration/signal of a predator with out the predator or threat of death and it simply becomes routine noise from which they have nothing to fear. Squid and other cephlapods do have an ear of sorts and can feel percussive noise through an audible organ in the brain. Does not mean that squid can hear only that they receive information to the brain differently to a normal fish.Please some one correct me if I am barking up the wrong tree, I am a garbo not a marine biologist.More carbon propaganda with hand picked statements to suck people in.

[weaver 271]

"What we have done here is to put today's fish in tomorrow's environment, and the effects are potentially devastating"I guess they ruled out the possibility that fish may actually evolve over the next 100 years to live in such water after their 20 day study, Throwing fish in diluted acidic water...... sounds like they were making roll mops

[kon 300]

ecofreakYou touched on the concept of potentially erroneous conclusions. A somewhat tongue-in-cheek response from a poster in another forum on this matter"I think the experiment could also be showing that the higher CO2 levels improve clown fish eyesight and intelligence so that although they were hearing a threatening noise they did not see anything threatening and concluded there was no need to react."And to continue the sardonic theme, loosely related to the "correlation = causation" line of argumentA scientist was interested in studying how far bullfrogs can jump. He brought a bullfrog into his laboratory, set it down, and commanded, ‘Jump, frog, jump!’. The frog jumped.The scientist measured the distance, then noted in his journal, ‘Frog with four legs jumped six feet.’Then he cut the frog’s front legs off and ordered, ‘Jump, frog, jump!’The frog struggled and jumped.The scientist noted in his journal, ‘Frog with two legs jumped two feet.’Next, the scientist cut off the frog’s back legs. Once more, he shouted, ‘Jump, frog, jump!’The frog just lay there.‘Jump, frog, jump!’ the scientist repeated.Nothing.The scientist noted in his journal, ‘Frog with no legs is deaf.’WeaverIt would have been slightly less alkaline than normal water, but certainly not acidic. Some things really annoy the crap out of me with current day subliminal propaganda repetition, and oceanic acidification is one of them - technically speaking certainly not incorrect (because of movement in that direction), but very conveniently sounds so much better than reduction of alkalinity (for that is the actual effect).Carbon (ahem, carbon dioxide) pollution (really?) is rather more blatant of course...Your reference to the evolutionary side of things...somebody elsewhere came up with this thought"Amemone fish/clownfish (Amphiprioninae) evolved from a common ancestor during the early Eocene, ~50 million year ago. They locate their symbiotic anemones by smell and communicate with each other through a series of “clicks”.The Eocene was an optimum with high temperatures and high CO2 levels (~1000 ppm).If high CO2 levels did this, they would not have evolved, they would not have been able to evolve symbiotic mutualisms with sea anemones, and would not be able to communicate and establish partnerships….."

[BombayDuck 0]

sounds like they were making roll mops

mmmmmmmmmmmm,roll mops

[weaver 271]

I know mate i was just taking the piss out of the study