1. talking points
4 Marine Scientist No.48 August 2014
B
ob Carling writes: The
debate about whether
a scientific paper, pub-
lished in a Frontiers in Psychol-
ogy, linking climate scepticism
to “conspiratorial ideation”,
and which led to three Fron-
tiers editors resigning, seems
set to continue. Climate
change is already a hot politi-
cal issue and there are claims
that the retraction of the arti-
cle was as a result of the pub-
lishers ‘caving in’ to intimi-
dation from climate change
deniers. Not surprisingly, the
controversy has created quite
a media storm, with claims
and counter claims.
Retraction Watch has
been following the contro-
versy and posted this by
the Frontiers Editor-in-chief
Henry Markham:
“The retracted Recursive
Fury paper has created quite
a blogger and twitter storm.
A sensational storm indeed,
with hints to conspiracy the-
ories, claims of legal threats
and perceived contradic-
● Controversial scientific
paper retracted
C
M
Y
CM
MY
CY
CMY
K
tions. It has been fury – one
of the strongest human emo-
tions – that has (perhaps un-
derstandably at first sight)
guided the discussion around
this retraction. Not surpris-
ingly though, the truth is
not as sensational and much
simpler. The studied subjects
were explicitly identified in
the paper without their con-
sent. It is well acknowledged
and accepted that in order to
protect a subject’s rights and
avoid a potentially defamato-
ry outcome, one must obtain
the subject’s consent if they
can be identified in a scien-
tific paper. The mistake was
detected after publication,
and the authors and Fron-
tiers worked hard together
for several months to try to
find a solution. In the end,
those efforts were not suc-
cessful. The identity of the
subjects could not be pro-
tected and the paper had to
be retracted. Frontiers then
worked closely with the au-
thors on a mutually agreed
and measured retraction
statement to avoid the re-
traction itself being misused.
From the storm this has cre-
ated, it would seem we did
not succeed.” 
To read more, see: http://www.
skepticalscience.com/republishers.
php?a=recurrentfury
http://retractionwatch.
com/2014/04/11/we-did-not-
succeed-frontiers-editor-on-
handling-of-controversial-retraction/
http://www.frontiersin.org/blog/
Rights_of_Human_Subjects_in_
Scientific_Papers/830
I
n the February 2013 issue of
Marine Scientist, we reported
on the threat of closure of
the University Marine Biolog-
ical Station Millport (UMB-
SM), due to the withdrawal of
funding by the Higher Edu-
cation Funding Council for
England (HEFCE).
On Friday 14 June, 2013,
a memorandum of under-
standing (MOU) was signed
with the Field Studies Coun-
cil (FSC) to secure its sustain-
able future. The agreement
saw ownership of the physical
assets of the Station, includ-
ing land, buildings and other
facilities, being transferred to
the FSC on 1st January 2014.
Maureen Boylan, the
University’s Deputy Secre-
tary, who led the negotia-
tions said: “This is very good
news indeed for the Station,
the island community and
the local economy. We are
delighted that the FSC, with
its outstanding reputation
in environmental education
has agreed to work with us to
find a sustainable future for
this valuable asset.
“We would like to extend
our thanks to all those indi-
viduals and organisations
who have worked so hard
with us to find a viable future
for the Station.”
Rob Lucas, Chief Execu-
tive of the FSC, said: “This
is an exciting opportunity
for the FSC. Our vision for
Millport field centre is for it
to become a flagship for field
studies in Scotland, building
on its reputation for high
quality field research and
university teaching. The
marine location will provide
the perfect complement to
the field studies we have
been developing at our FSC
Kindrogan field centre in
the Highlands over the past
10 years”. 
http://www.field-studies-council.org/
news/agreement-reached-over-future-
of-marine-biological-station.aspx
● Future of Marine
Biological Station
Talk4-7.indd 4 25/07/2014 09:58

2. No.48 August 2014 Marine Scientist 5
T
he RSPB writes: One
of the UK’s rarest sea-
birds could become a
victim of climate change as
rising seas and increased
coastal flooding squeezes the
UK’s coastline.
Little terns, the UK’s
smallest tern species, re-
turn each April to breed on
beaches at fewer than sixty
sites around the UK. Tradi-
tional colonies at South Gare
on the Tees and Donna Nook
in Lincolnshire have already
been lost due to changes in
our coastline and just one
nesting site remains in Wales.
Predictions of increased
coastal flooding and sea
level rise caused by climate
change could spell disaster
for these elegant seabirds.
This warning came as the
Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) is-
sued their latest reports on
climate change.1
Susan Rendell-Read is
the RSPB’s little tern project
manager: “Little terns are
very vulnerable to the im-
pacts of climate change. They
need undisturbed sand and
shingle beaches to nest with a
plentiful supply of small fish
just offshore. These beaches
● Climate change and seabirds
can be quickly altered by
rising seas and floods, mak-
ing them unsuitable for
terns to nest.
“In the past, the areas
lost to flooding or storms
would be offset by new are-
as of sand or shingle thrown
up by the sea. This is now
being prevented by hard
sea defences and other man
made developments. The
result, known as coastal
squeeze, means beaches are
getting narrower and the
little terns are quickly run-
ning out of space.
“As rising sea levels and
storms change our coast-
line, little terns are forced
into fewer and fewer colo-
nies and have to share space
with people on some of our
most popular beaches, lead-
ing to significant problems
with disturbance.”
A major new five-year
partnership, including the
RSPB, Natural England
and the National Trust,2
has
been established to help lit-
tle terns adapt to climate
change and secure their fu-
ture in the UK. This part-
nership, supported by the
EU LIFE + programme
will lay the foundations for
the long-term recovery of the
little tern in the UK by pro-
tecting and creating nest sites
and increasing public aware-
ness and support.
An important part of the
recovery plan is ensuring
that the few sites where little
terns continue to breed are
protected from disturbance.3
The RSPB and its partners
are keen to raise awareness
amongst local communities
and beachgoers to give little
terns space to breed safely
and in peace.
Victoria Egan manages
little tern colonies for the
National Trust at Blakeney
National Nature Reserve in
Norfolk said, “local commu-
nities and beachgoers have
a vital role to play in help-
ing little terns cope with the
increasing threat of climate
change. These tiny seabirds
need space to breed un-
disturbed so we are urging
visitors to these beaches to
follow any directions and ad-
vice given on local signs on
the beach and avoid entering
certain areas while the little
terns are breeding”.
Susan added “These
dainty little seabirds, no
heavier than a tennis ball,
have just started returning
to our shores after travelling
thousands of miles from their
wintering sites off the south
and west coasts of Africa. We
need to make sure that they
have the best chance of find-
ing a suitable home when
they arrive.” 
1. The IPCC 5th Assessment
Report Working Group II – Impacts,
Adaptation and Vulnerability was
published on 31 March 2014 and
Working group III – Mitigation on
14 April 2014 http://www.ipcc.ch/
index.htm.
2. The EU LIFE + Project partners
are: Cumbria Wildlife Trust,
Denbighshire County Council,
Durham County Council, Industry
Nature Conservation Association,
Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust,
Northumberland Coast AONB
partnership, Northumberland
County Council, Natural England,
National Trust, RSPB and Spurn
Bird Observatory Trust
3. Little terns are listed on Schedule
1 of the Wildlife and Countryside
Act 1981, which makes it illegal to
intentionally or recklessly disturb
them while nesting. There are
approximate 1500 pairs of little
terns in the UK. Their population
has declined by 9% between 1986
and 2012.
T
he National Oceanog-
raphy Centre (NOC)
has announced a two-
year partnership with the In-
stitute of Marine Engineer-
ing Science and Technology
(IMarEST).
Engaging with the glo-
bal marine industry topped
NOC’s reasons for partnering
the Institute –which counts
15,000 marine professionals
from more than 100 coun-
tries among its members.
The association will allow
NOC to share its expertise
and have input into the Insti-
● NOC to partner IMarEST
tute’s highly-regarded Spe-
cial Interest Groups (SIGs).
Steve Hall, from NOC’s
International & Strategic
Partnerships, said: “NOC val-
ues being able to work with a
highly regarded international
Professional Body to jointly ad-
dress the great challenges fac-
ing the ocean, to benefit from
a closer working relationship
with marine professionals in in-
dustry, and to encourage more
people to consider a future
in marine science, engineer-
ing and technology. IMarEST
also provides an opportunity
for our staff to seek accredited
professional status, which will
improve their career prospects
and their understanding of the
requirements of the broader
marine sector.”
The partnership will
build on NOC’s existing
work with IMarEST which
sees them consulting on both
government and interna-
tional bodies including the
Intergovernmental Oceano-
graphic Commission (IOC)
and International Maritime
Organisation (IMO).
IMarEST’s Chief Execu-
tive, David Loosley, said: “We
are pleased to be working
closely with the National Oce-
anography Centre. A partner-
ship such as this enables us
to further enhance the IMa-
rEST’s global technical voice
by increasing relevant techni-
cal expertise for our Special
Interest Groups for the ben-
efit of all of our members and
corporate marine partners
around the world.” 
For more information about IMarEST’s
corporate marine partnerships:
www.imarest.org/PartnerWithUs
Talk4-7.indd 5 25/07/2014 09:58

3. talking points
6 Marine Scientist No.48 August 2014
● Ripples up the food chain
J
asmin Fox-Skelly writes:
Climate change in the
Antarctic is sending
ripples up the food chain,
with impacts on everything
from single-celled algae to
penguins, according to re-
searchers.
The West Antarctic Pe-
ninsula is one of the fastest
warming regions on Earth,
with annual winter temper-
atures increasing by 11°F
(about 6.1°C) during the last
50 years. According to a new
study, these changes may
have profound affects on the
area’s marine life.
The team, led by Dr
Grace Saba, a marine biolo-
gist and Assistant Research
Professor at IMCS Rutgers
University, US, are mem-
bers of the Palmer Long-
Term Ecological Research
program (PAL-LTER),
which has conducted annual
shipboard surveys along the
western side of the Antarctic
Peninsula since 1990.
Studying the area over
such a long period of time
has meant that the research-
ers have been able to build
up a complete picture of how
climate can affect marine life.
In a new paper, published in
the journal Nature Communi-
cations, the scientists describe
the way in which the South-
ern Annular Mode (SAM),
has had dramatic effects on
populations of photosynthet-
ic algae that are the founda-
tions of the Antarctic food
chain.
The SAM is a climate
phenomenon caused by
the north-to-south move-
ment of the westerly wind
belt that circles Antarctica.
The changing position of
the wind belt influences the
strength and position of cold
fronts and storm systems,
and is linked to variations in
temperatures over Antarcti-
ca, sea-surface temperatures
throughout the Southern
Ocean, and the distribution
of sea-ice around the perim-
eter of Antarctica.
The researchers found
that populations of the pho-
tosynthetic algae peaked
every 4 to 6 years in the wa-
ters along the West Antarctic
Peninsula, correlating di-
rectly with what is called the
negative phase of the SAM.
In winter during a negative
phase of SAM, cold south-
erly winds blow across the
Peninsula, increasing the ex-
tent of winter ice. In spring
and summer months during
a negative phase of SAM,
winds are significantly re-
duced, meaning that the ice
stays longer.
Adélie parents and chicks on Avian Island along the West
Antarctic Peninsula. Note how their krill-rich diet and faeces stain
the surroundings pink. Photo courtesy of Donna Patterson-Fraser.
Talk4-7.indd 6 25/07/2014 09:58

4. No.48 August 2014 Marine Scientist 7
Southern Annular
Mode (SAM)
• Positive phase: band of
westerly winds contract
towards Antarctica
• Negative phase: band of
westerly winds expands
towards the equator
According to Saba, “The
combination of a windy win-
ter with heavy sea ice followed
by a calm spring favours the
development and persistence
of a stable water column in
the summer along the West
Antarctic Peninsula.” A layer
of fresh ice-melt develops that
floats on top of a saltier layer
below. Phytoplankton thrive
in this environment because
they can get closer to the sun-
lit surface and the iron-rich
glacial meltwater that they
need to thrive.
If phytoplankton are do-
ing well, this is good news
for animals further up the
food chain that rely on them
for food. Indeed the study
showed that the area’s peri-
odic phytoplankton blooms
led to increased krill ‘recruit-
ment’ – the addition of new,
young individuals into the
krill population. Many Ant-
arctic species rely on krill for
food, including Antarctic fur
seals, macaroni and gentoo
penguins, and albatross, as
well as baleen whales such as
humpbacks. Adélie penguins
in particular rely extensively
on krill, as they form the ba-
sis of their diet.
“When climate conditions
– a negative SAM and stable
water column – lead to peaks
in the abundance of phyto-
plankton and krill, Adélie
penguins don’t have to go
far to forage,” explains Saba.
“But when SAM is positive,
warm northwesterly winds
blow over the Peninsula re-
gion, bringing less sea ice
and a less-stable water col-
umn – factors that discourage
the large blooms of phyto-
plankton on which krill rely.
Penguins then have to for-
age further, and thus end up
delivering less food to their
chicks. That can decrease
their reproductive success.”
Unfortunately, evidence
shows that the population of
Adélie penguins near Palmer
Station has fallen by 85%
since 1974. Although there
are many factors that play a
part in this, there is concern
that future climate models
project an increase in the
occurrence of positive SAM
episodes during the coming
century. This would lead to
lower levels of phytoplank-
ton, fewer krill, and there-
fore could spell problems for
Adélie penguins.
“Projections from glo-
bal climate models under
‘business-as-usual’ emission
scenarios up to the year 2100
suggest a further increase in
temperature and in the oc-
currence of positive SAM con-
ditions,” says Saba. “If even
one positive SAM episode
lasted longer than the krill
lifespan – 4 or 6 years with
decreased phytoplankton
abundance and krill recruit-
ment – it could be catastroph-
ic to the krill population.” 
These krill—recovered from a
penguin’s stomach through a
non-invasive procedure called
lavage—show the importance
of these shrimplike crusta-
ceans to the penguin diet.
Photo courtesy of Donna
Patterson-Fraser.
A
sking the question,
‘What are the Ocean
Business Community
Priorities for Engaging in
Ocean Policy and Marine
Planning Developments?’,
The World Ocean Council
Business Forum on Ocean
Policy and Planning will
convene in New York City,
29–30 September, 2014.
Proposed changes to
ocean governance, policy and
planning – and challenges to
ocean economic activity – are
moving forward rapidly at
national, regional and inter-
national levels. Representa-
tives of oil and gas, shipping,
seafood, fisheries, mining,
aquaculture, renewable en-
ergy, ocean data, science and
●
Ocean policy and planning
technology, maritime law,
and other sectors of the di-
verse Ocean Business Com-
munity will gather to address
the need to be more informed
and involved in policy and
planning activities affecting
ocean economic activity.
All members of the in-
ternational Ocean Business
Community are welcome.
WOC Members receive re-
duced registration rates. 
Visit http://www.oceancouncil.org
to register.
Contact: Paul Holthus, CEO
Phone: +1 (808) 277-9008
email: paul.holthus@
oceancouncil.org
www.oceancouncil.org
Talk4-7.indd 7 25/07/2014 09:58