破解神话:双壳贝养殖不是二氧化碳汇

IF 8.8 1区 农林科学 Q1 FISHERIES
Fabrice Pernet, Sam Dupont, Jean-Pierre Gattuso, Marc Metian, Frédéric Gazeau
{"title":"破解神话:双壳贝养殖不是二氧化碳汇","authors":"Fabrice Pernet,&nbsp;Sam Dupont,&nbsp;Jean-Pierre Gattuso,&nbsp;Marc Metian,&nbsp;Frédéric Gazeau","doi":"10.1111/raq.12954","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Bivalve farming was usually considered as a CO<sub>2</sub> source through respiration and calcification, but recent studies suggest its potential as a CO<sub>2</sub> sink, prompting exploration of its inclusion in carbon markets. Here we reviewed the scientific basis behind this idea and found that it is not supported by observational and experimental studies. This idea indeed arises from carbon budget models that are based on theoretical misconceptions regarding seawater carbonate chemistry. The main misunderstanding consists of assuming that the carbon trapped in the shell originates from atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> when it mostly comes from (bi)carbonate ions. While these ions originate from atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> through the erosion of minerals over geological time scales, their incorporation into shells does not prompt short-term CO<sub>2</sub> compensation. The opposite occurs—calcification releases CO<sub>2</sub> in seawater and limits or even prevents the uptake of atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub>. Some authors suggest that considering the bivalve farm ecosystem could change the perspective on the source/sink issue but there is no evidence for that now. Most ecosystem-based carbon budget models rely on several unverified assumptions and estimates. Although challenging, field measurements must be conducted for monitoring, reporting, and verifying atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> uptake before qualifying for carbon credits. To achieve scientific consensus, we need reinforcing measurement-based studies of CO<sub>2</sub> fluxes in shellfish ecosystems, integrating carbon balance models with observational and experimental science, and fostering interdisciplinary collaboration. Although bivalve farming provides numerous environmental benefits and is vital for sustainable aquaculture, there is currently no evidence that it contributes to CO<sub>2</sub> capture.</p>","PeriodicalId":227,"journal":{"name":"Reviews in Aquaculture","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/raq.12954","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cracking the myth: Bivalve farming is not a CO2 sink\",\"authors\":\"Fabrice Pernet,&nbsp;Sam Dupont,&nbsp;Jean-Pierre Gattuso,&nbsp;Marc Metian,&nbsp;Frédéric Gazeau\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/raq.12954\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Bivalve farming was usually considered as a CO<sub>2</sub> source through respiration and calcification, but recent studies suggest its potential as a CO<sub>2</sub> sink, prompting exploration of its inclusion in carbon markets. Here we reviewed the scientific basis behind this idea and found that it is not supported by observational and experimental studies. This idea indeed arises from carbon budget models that are based on theoretical misconceptions regarding seawater carbonate chemistry. The main misunderstanding consists of assuming that the carbon trapped in the shell originates from atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> when it mostly comes from (bi)carbonate ions. While these ions originate from atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> through the erosion of minerals over geological time scales, their incorporation into shells does not prompt short-term CO<sub>2</sub> compensation. The opposite occurs—calcification releases CO<sub>2</sub> in seawater and limits or even prevents the uptake of atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub>. Some authors suggest that considering the bivalve farm ecosystem could change the perspective on the source/sink issue but there is no evidence for that now. Most ecosystem-based carbon budget models rely on several unverified assumptions and estimates. Although challenging, field measurements must be conducted for monitoring, reporting, and verifying atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> uptake before qualifying for carbon credits. To achieve scientific consensus, we need reinforcing measurement-based studies of CO<sub>2</sub> fluxes in shellfish ecosystems, integrating carbon balance models with observational and experimental science, and fostering interdisciplinary collaboration. Although bivalve farming provides numerous environmental benefits and is vital for sustainable aquaculture, there is currently no evidence that it contributes to CO<sub>2</sub> capture.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":227,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reviews in Aquaculture\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/raq.12954\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reviews in Aquaculture\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/raq.12954\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"FISHERIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reviews in Aquaculture","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/raq.12954","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FISHERIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

双壳贝类养殖通常被认为是通过呼吸作用和钙化作用产生二氧化碳的来源,但最近的研究表明,双壳贝类养殖有可能成为二氧化碳的吸收汇,这促使人们探索将双壳贝类养殖纳入碳市场。在此,我们回顾了这一观点背后的科学依据,发现观测和实验研究并不支持这一观点。事实上,这种观点源于碳预算模型,而碳预算模型是建立在对海水碳酸盐化学的理论误解之上的。主要的误解包括假设被困在贝壳中的碳来自大气中的二氧化碳,而这些碳主要来自(双)碳酸根离子。虽然这些离子是通过地质时间尺度上的矿物侵蚀作用从大气中的二氧化碳中产生的,但它们融入贝壳中并不会引起短期的二氧化碳补偿。相反,钙化会释放海水中的二氧化碳,限制甚至阻止吸收大气中的二氧化碳。一些作者认为,考虑双壳类养殖场生态系统可以改变对源/汇问题的看法,但现在还没有证据证明这一点。大多数基于生态系统的碳预算模型都依赖于一些未经验证的假设和估计。尽管具有挑战性,但在获得碳信用额度之前,必须进行实地测量,以监测、报告和验证大气中二氧化碳的吸收量。为了达成科学共识,我们需要加强对贝类生态系统二氧化碳通量的测量研究,将碳平衡模型与观测和实验科学相结合,并促进跨学科合作。尽管双壳贝类养殖对环境有诸多益处,对可持续水产养殖也至关重要,但目前还没有证据表明它有助于捕获二氧化碳。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Cracking the myth: Bivalve farming is not a CO2 sink

Cracking the myth: Bivalve farming is not a CO2 sink

Bivalve farming was usually considered as a CO2 source through respiration and calcification, but recent studies suggest its potential as a CO2 sink, prompting exploration of its inclusion in carbon markets. Here we reviewed the scientific basis behind this idea and found that it is not supported by observational and experimental studies. This idea indeed arises from carbon budget models that are based on theoretical misconceptions regarding seawater carbonate chemistry. The main misunderstanding consists of assuming that the carbon trapped in the shell originates from atmospheric CO2 when it mostly comes from (bi)carbonate ions. While these ions originate from atmospheric CO2 through the erosion of minerals over geological time scales, their incorporation into shells does not prompt short-term CO2 compensation. The opposite occurs—calcification releases CO2 in seawater and limits or even prevents the uptake of atmospheric CO2. Some authors suggest that considering the bivalve farm ecosystem could change the perspective on the source/sink issue but there is no evidence for that now. Most ecosystem-based carbon budget models rely on several unverified assumptions and estimates. Although challenging, field measurements must be conducted for monitoring, reporting, and verifying atmospheric CO2 uptake before qualifying for carbon credits. To achieve scientific consensus, we need reinforcing measurement-based studies of CO2 fluxes in shellfish ecosystems, integrating carbon balance models with observational and experimental science, and fostering interdisciplinary collaboration. Although bivalve farming provides numerous environmental benefits and is vital for sustainable aquaculture, there is currently no evidence that it contributes to CO2 capture.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
24.80
自引率
5.80%
发文量
109
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Reviews in Aquaculture is a journal that aims to provide a platform for reviews on various aspects of aquaculture science, techniques, policies, and planning. The journal publishes fully peer-reviewed review articles on topics including global, regional, and national production and market trends in aquaculture, advancements in aquaculture practices and technology, interactions between aquaculture and the environment, indigenous and alien species in aquaculture, genetics and its relation to aquaculture, as well as aquaculture product quality and traceability. The journal is indexed and abstracted in several databases including AgBiotech News & Information (CABI), AgBiotechNet, Agricultural Engineering Abstracts, Environment Index (EBSCO Publishing), SCOPUS (Elsevier), and Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics) among others.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信