ALBERT

Description: © The Author(s), 2021. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Blevins, M. G., Allen, H. L., Colson, B. C., Cook, A.-M., Greenbaum, A. Z., Hemami, S. S., Hollmann, J., Kim, E., LaRocca, A. A., Markoski, K. A., Miraglia, P., Mott, V. L., Robberson, W. M., Santos, J. A., Sprachman, M. M., Swierk, P., Tate, S., Witinski, M. F., Kratchman, L. B., & Michel, A. P. M. Field-portable microplastic sensing in aqueous environments: a perspective on emerging techniques. Sensors, 21(10), (2021): 3532, https://doi.org/10.3390/s21103532.

Description: Microplastics (MPs) have been found in aqueous environments ranging from rural ponds and lakes to the deep ocean. Despite the ubiquity of MPs, our ability to characterize MPs in the environment is limited by the lack of technologies for rapidly and accurately identifying and quantifying MPs. Although standards exist for MP sample collection and preparation, methods of MP analysis vary considerably and produce data with a broad range of data content and quality. The need for extensive analysis-specific sample preparation in current technology approaches has hindered the emergence of a single technique which can operate on aqueous samples in the field, rather than on dried laboratory preparations. In this perspective, we consider MP measurement technologies with a focus on both their eventual field-deployability and their respective data products (e.g., MP particle count, size, and/or polymer type). We present preliminary demonstrations of several prospective MP measurement techniques, with an eye towards developing a solution or solutions that can transition from the laboratory to the field. Specifically, experimental results are presented from multiple prototype systems that measure various physical properties of MPs: pyrolysis-differential mobility spectroscopy, short-wave infrared imaging, aqueous Nile Red labeling and counting, acoustophoresis, ultrasound, impedance spectroscopy, and dielectrophoresis.

Description: We greatly thank our funding agencies: Gerstner Philanthropies (to A.P.M.M.), the Richard Saltonstall Charitable Foundation (to A.P.M.M.), and the Wallace Research Foundation (to A.P.M.M. and S.S.H.). Funding for M.G.B. was provided by a Draper Fellowship and to B.C.C. by an MIT Martin Fellowship. Draper thanks EPA region 9 for their partnership and support through a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement, an industry/government agreement regarding funding and personnel contributions of time and expertise.

Description: © The Author(s), 2022. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Hand, K., Phillips, C., Murray, A., Garvin, J., Maize, E., Gibbs, R., Reeves, G., San Martin, A., Tan-Wang, G., Krajewski, J., Hurst, K., Crum, R., Kennedy, B., McElrath, T., Gallon, J., Sabahi, D., Thurman, S., Goldstein, B., Estabrook, P., Lee, S. W., Dooley, J. A., Brinckerhoff, W. B., Edgett, K. S., German, C. R., Hoehler, T. M., Hörst, S. M., Lunine, J. I., Paranicas, C., Nealson, K., Smith, D. E., Templeton, A. S., Russell, M. J., Schmidt, B., Christner, B., Ehlmann, B., Hayes, A., Rhoden, A., Willis, P., Yingst, R. A., Craft, K., Cameron, M. E., Nordheim, T., Pitesky, J., Scully, J., Hofgartner, J., Sell, S. W., Barltrop, K. J., Izraelevitz, J., Brandon, E. J., Seong, J., Jones, J.-P., Pasalic, J., Billings, K. J., Ruiz, J. P., Bugga, R. V., Graham, D., Arenas, L. A., Takeyama, D., Drummond, M., Aghazarian, H., Andersen, A. J., Andersen, K. B., Anderson, E. W., Babuscia, A., Backes, P. G., Bailey, E. S., Balentine, D., Ballard, C. G., Berisford, D. F., Bhandari, P., Blackwood, K., Bolotin, G. S., Bovre, E. A., Bowkett, J., Boykins, K. T., Bramble, M. S., Brice, T. M., Briggs, P., Brinkman, A. P., Brooks, S. M., Buffington, B. B., Burns, B., Cable, M. L., Campagnola, S., Cangahuala, L. A., Carr, G. A., Casani, J. R., Chahat, N. E., Chamberlain-Simon, B. K., Cheng, Y., Chien, S. A., Cook, B. T., Cooper, M., DiNicola, M., Clement, B., Dean, Z., Cullimore, E. A., Curtis, A. G., Croix, J-P. de la, Pasquale, P. Di, Dodd, E. M., Dubord, L. A., Edlund, J. A., Ellyin, R., Emanuel, B., Foster, J. T., Ganino, A. J., Garner, G. J., Gibson, M. T., Gildner, M., Glazebrook, K. J., Greco, M. E., Green, W. M., Hatch, S. J., Hetzel, M. M., Hoey, W. A., Hofmann, A. E., Ionasescu, R., Jain, A., Jasper, J. D., Johannesen, J. R., Johnson, G. K., Jun, I., Katake, A. B., Kim-Castet, S. Y., Kim, D. I., Kim, W., Klonicki, E. F., Kobeissi, B., Kobie, B. D., Kochocki, J., Kokorowski, M., Kosberg, J. A., Kriechbaum, K., Kulkarni, T. P., Lam, R. L., Landau, D. F., Lattimore, M. A., Laubach, S. L., Lawler, C. R., Lim, G., Lin, J. Y., Litwin, T. E., Lo, M. W., Logan, C. A., Maghasoudi, E., Mandrake, L., Marchetti, Y., Marteau, E., Maxwell, K. A., Namee, J. B. Mc, Mcintyre, O., Meacham, M., Melko, J. P., Mueller, J., Muliere, D. A., Mysore, A., Nash, J., Ono, H., Parker, J. M., Perkins, R. C., Petropoulos, A. E., Gaut, A., Gomez, M. Y. Piette, Casillas, R. P., Preudhomme, M., Pyrzak, G., Rapinchuk, J., Ratliff, J. M., Ray, T. L., Roberts, E. T., Roffo, K., Roth, D. C., Russino, J. A., Schmidt, T. M., Schoppers, M. J., Senent, J. S., Serricchio, F., Sheldon, D. J., Shiraishi, L. R., Shirvanian, J., Siegel, K. J., Singh, G., Sirota, A. R., Skulsky, E. D., Stehly, J. S., Strange, N. J., Stevens, S. U., Sunada, E. T., Tepsuporn, S. P., Tosi, L. P. C., Trawny, N., Uchenik, I., Verma, V., Volpe, R. A., Wagner, C. T., Wang, D., Willson, R. G., Wolff, J. L., Wong, A. T., Zimmer, A. K., Sukhatme, K. G., Bago, K. A., Chen, Y., Deardorff, A. M., Kuch, R. S., Lim, C., Syvertson, M. L., Arakaki, G. A., Avila, A., DeBruin, K. J., Frick, A., Harris, J. R., Heverly, M. C., Kawata, J. M., Kim, S.-K., Kipp, D. M., Murphy, J., Smith, M. W., Spaulding, M. D., Thakker, R., Warner, N. Z., Yahnker, C. R., Young, M. E., Magner, T., Adams, D., Bedini, P., Mehr, L., Sheldon, C., Vernon, S., Bailey, V., Briere, M., Butler, M., Davis, A., Ensor, S., Gannon, M., Haapala-Chalk, A., Hartka, T., Holdridge, M., Hong, A., Hunt, J., Iskow, J., Kahler, F., Murray, K., Napolillo, D., Norkus, M., Pfisterer, R., Porter, J., Roth, D., Schwartz, P., Wolfarth, L., Cardiff, E. H., Davis, A., Grob, E. W., Adam, J. R., Betts, E., Norwood, J., Heller, M. M., Voskuilen, T., Sakievich, P., Gray, L., Hansen, D. J., Irick, K. W., Hewson, J. C., Lamb, J., Stacy, S. C., Brotherton, C. M., Tappan, A. S., Benally, D., Thigpen, H., Ortiz, E., Sandoval, D., Ison, A. M., Warren, M., Stromberg, P. G., Thelen, P. M., Blasy, B., Nandy, P., Haddad, A. W., Trujillo, L. B., Wiseley, T. H., Bell, S. A., Teske, N. P., Post, C., Torres-Castro, L., Grosso, C. Wasiolek, M. Science goals and mission architecture of the Europa Lander mission concept. The Planetary Science Journal, 3(1), (2022): 22, https://doi.org/10.3847/psj/ac4493.

Description: Europa is a premier target for advancing both planetary science and astrobiology, as well as for opening a new window into the burgeoning field of comparative oceanography. The potentially habitable subsurface ocean of Europa may harbor life, and the globally young and comparatively thin ice shell of Europa may contain biosignatures that are readily accessible to a surface lander. Europa's icy shell also offers the opportunity to study tectonics and geologic cycles across a range of mechanisms and compositions. Here we detail the goals and mission architecture of the Europa Lander mission concept, as developed from 2015 through 2020. The science was developed by the 2016 Europa Lander Science Definition Team (SDT), and the mission architecture was developed by the preproject engineering team, in close collaboration with the SDT. In 2017 and 2018, the mission concept passed its mission concept review and delta-mission concept review, respectively. Since that time, the preproject has been advancing the technologies, and developing the hardware and software, needed to retire risks associated with technology, science, cost, and schedule.

Description: K.P.H., C.B.P., E.M., and all authors affiliated with the Jet Propulsion Laboratory carried out this research at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (grant No. 80NM0018D0004). J.I.L. was the David Baltimore Distinguished Visiting Scientist during the preparation of the SDT report. JPL/Caltech2021.

Description: Macroalgae (or seaweed) aquaculture can potentially provide many ecosystem services, including climate change mitigation, coastal protection, preservation of biodiversity and improvement of water quality. Nevertheless, there are still many constraints and knowledge gaps that need to be overcome, as well as potential negative impacts or scale-dependent effects that need to be considered, before macroalgae cultivation in Europe can be scaled up successfully and sustainably. To investigate these uncertainties, the Expert Working Group (EWG) on Macroalgae was established. Its role was to determine the state of knowledge regarding the potential of macroalgae culture in providing climate-related and other ecosystem services (ES) and to identify specific knowledge gaps that must be addressed before harvesting this potential. The methodological framework combined a multiple expert consultation with Delphi process and a Quick Scoping Review (QSR). To analyse the outcome of both approaches, the EWG classified the findings under the categories Political, Environmental, Social, Technical, Economic and Legal (PESTEL approach) and categorised the ES based on the CICES 5.1 classification. Although representative stakeholders from many different disciplines were contacted, the majority of responses to the Delphi process were from representatives of academia or research. While the results of each method differed in many ways, both methods identified the following top six ecosystem services provided by seaweed cultivation: i) provisioning food, ii) provisioning hydrocolloids and feed, iii) regulating water quality, iv) provisioning habitats, v) provisioning of nurseries and vi) regulating climate. Diverse technological knowledge gaps were identified by both methods at all scales of the macroalgae cultivation process, followed by economic and environmental knowledge gaps depending on the method used. Based on suggestions from the expert respondents in the Delphi process, there is a clear need for an European-wide strategy for reducing risks for seaweed producers, providing clear standards and guidelines for obtaining permits, and providing financial support to improve technological innovation, that will ensure consistent quality. Legal (e.g., safety regulations), economic (e.g., lack of demand for seaweeds in many countries) and technological (e.g., production at large scale) constraints represented almost 70% of the total responses in the Delphi process, whereas environmental and technical constraints were more dominant in the literature. The most commonly identified potential negative impacts of macroalgae cultivation both among the expert responses and the reviewed articles were unknown environmental impacts, e.g. to deep sea, benthic and pelagic ecosystems. The present study provides an assessment of the state of knowledge regarding ES provided by seaweed cultivation and identifies the associated knowledge gaps, constraints and potential negative impacts. One of the main hurdles recognised by the EWG was the understanding of ES themselves by the different stakeholders, as well as the issue of scale. Studies providing clear evidence of ES provided by seaweed cultivation and/or valorisation of these services were lacking in the literature, and some aspects, like cultural impact etc. were missing in the responses to the questionnaires during the Delphi process. The issue of scale and scaling-up was omnipresent both in assessing the ES provided by seaweed cultivation and in identifying knowledge gaps, constraints and potential negative impacts. For example, the ES provided will depend on the scale of cultivation, the main technological knowledge gaps were often related to scale of cultivation. Likewise at a large scale of operations, there could be multiple associated potential side effects, which need to be further investigated. Based on the outcomes of this investigation, we provide an outlook with open questions that need to be answered to support the sustainable scaling-up of seaweed cultivation in Europe.

Description: © The Author(s), 2021. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Rodellas, V., Stieglitz, T. C., Tamborski, J. J., van Beek, P., Andrisoa, A., & Cook, P. G. Conceptual uncertainties in groundwater and porewater fluxes estimated by radon and radium mass balances. Limnology and Oceanography, (2021), https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.11678.

Description: Radium isotopes and radon are routinely used as tracers to quantify groundwater and porewater fluxes into coastal and freshwater systems. However, uncertainties associated with the determination of the tracer flux are often poorly addressed and often neglect all the potential errors associated with the conceptualization of the system (i.e., conceptual uncertainties). In this study, we assess the magnitude of some of the key uncertainties related to the determination of the radium and radon inputs supplied by groundwater and porewater fluxes into a waterbody (La Palme Lagoon, France). This uncertainty assessment is addressed through a single model ensemble approach, where a tracer mass balance is run multiple times with variable sets of assumptions and approaches for the key parameters determined through a sensitivity test. In particular, conceptual uncertainties linked to tracer concentration, diffusive fluxes, radon evasion to the atmosphere, and change of tracer inventory over time were considered. The magnitude of porewater fluxes is further constrained using a comparison of independent methods: (1) 224Ra and (2) 222Rn mass balances in overlying waters, (3) a model of 222Rn deficit in sediments, and (4) a fluid‐salt numerical transport model. We demonstrate that conceptual uncertainties are commonly a major source of uncertainty on the estimation of groundwater or porewater fluxes and they need to be taken into account when using tracer mass balances. In the absence of a general framework for assessing these uncertainties, this study provides a practical approach to evaluate key uncertainties associated to radon and radium mass balances.

Description: This research is a contribution to the ANR @RAction chair (ANR‐14‐ACHN‐0007‐01—T Stieglitz) and Labex OT‐Med (ANR‐11‐LABEX‐0061, part of the “Investissements d'Avenir” program through the A*MIDEX project ANR‐11‐IDEX‐0001‐02) funded by the French National Research Agency (ANR). This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska‐Curie grant 748896. V. Rodellas acknowledges financial support from the Beatriu de Pinós postdoctoral programme of the Catalan Government (2017‐BP‐00334). P. van Beek acknowledges financial support from the ANR (MED‐SGD project, ANR‐15‐CE01‐0004). We thank S. Thomas (Labex OT‐Med) for constructive comments and M. Diego‐Feliu for his help on statistical analysis. This study contributes to the work carried out by the MERS research group 2017‐SGR‐1588.

Description: Dataset: Core biogeochemical properties, 2018-2019

Description: Eleven soil cores (~2 m deep) were collected, one meter inland from the marsh edge, from four sites within Barataria Basin, LA, USA in Sept. 2018 and Aug. 2019. In addition, three soil cores (0.5 m deep) taken from the estuarine bottom 25 m offshore from the edge of a marsh site. During sampling, the depth of the estuary was 1 m relative to the marsh surface. The cores were sectioned into 10 cm intervals and analyzed for soil biogeochemical properties with depth. For a complete list of measurements, refer to the full dataset description in the supplemental file 'Dataset_description.pdf'. The most current version of this dataset is available at: https://www.bco-dmo.org/dataset/833824

Description: NSF Division of Ocean Sciences (NSF OCE) OCE-1635837

Description: © The Author(s), 2020. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Heaton, T. J., Koehler, P., Butzin, M., Bard, E., Reimer, R. W., Austin, W. E. N., Ramsey, C. B., Grootes, P. M., Hughen, K. A., Kromer, B., Reimer, P. J., Adkins, J., Burke, A., Cook, M. S., Olsen, J., & Skinner, L. C. Marine20-the marine radiocarbon age calibration curve (0-55,000 cal BP). Radiocarbon, 62(4), (2020): 779-820, doi:10.1017/RDC.2020.68.

Description: The concentration of radiocarbon (14C) differs between ocean and atmosphere. Radiocarbon determinations from samples which obtained their 14C in the marine environment therefore need a marine-specific calibration curve and cannot be calibrated directly against the atmospheric-based IntCal20 curve. This paper presents Marine20, an update to the internationally agreed marine radiocarbon age calibration curve that provides a non-polar global-average marine record of radiocarbon from 0–55 cal kBP and serves as a baseline for regional oceanic variation. Marine20 is intended for calibration of marine radiocarbon samples from non-polar regions; it is not suitable for calibration in polar regions where variability in sea ice extent, ocean upwelling and air-sea gas exchange may have caused larger changes to concentrations of marine radiocarbon. The Marine20 curve is based upon 500 simulations with an ocean/atmosphere/biosphere box-model of the global carbon cycle that has been forced by posterior realizations of our Northern Hemispheric atmospheric IntCal20 14C curve and reconstructed changes in CO2 obtained from ice core data. These forcings enable us to incorporate carbon cycle dynamics and temporal changes in the atmospheric 14C level. The box-model simulations of the global-average marine radiocarbon reservoir age are similar to those of a more complex three-dimensional ocean general circulation model. However, simplicity and speed of the box model allow us to use a Monte Carlo approach to rigorously propagate the uncertainty in both the historic concentration of atmospheric 14C and other key parameters of the carbon cycle through to our final Marine20 calibration curve. This robust propagation of uncertainty is fundamental to providing reliable precision for the radiocarbon age calibration of marine based samples. We make a first step towards deconvolving the contributions of different processes to the total uncertainty; discuss the main differences of Marine20 from the previous age calibration curve Marine13; and identify the limitations of our approach together with key areas for further work. The updated values for ΔR, the regional marine radiocarbon reservoir age corrections required to calibrate against Marine20, can be found at the data base http://calib.org/marine/.

Description: We would like to thank Jeremy Oakley and Richard Bintanja for informative discussions during the development of this work. T.J. Heaton is supported by a Leverhulme Trust Fellowship RF-2019-140\9, “Improving the Measurement of Time Using Radiocarbon”. M Butzin is supported by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), as Research for Sustainability initiative (FONA); www.fona.de through the PalMod project (grant numbers: 01LP1505B, 01LP1919A). E. Bard is supported by EQUIPEX ASTER-CEREGE and ANR CARBOTRYDH. Meetings of the IntCal Marine Focus group have been supported by Collège de France. Data are available on the PANGAEA database at doi:10.159/ANGAEA.914500.