Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 259

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Testing the direct effect of CO2 concentration on a bloom of the coccolithophorid Emiliania huxleyi in mesocosm experiments

Open access
Engel, Anja, Zondervan, Ingrid, Aerts, Katrien, Beaufort, Luc, Benthien, Albert, Chou, Lei, Delille, Bruno, Gattuso, Jean-Pierre, Harlay, Jerome, Heemann, Christel, Hoffmann, Linn, Jacquet, Stéphan, Nejstgaard, Jens, Pizay, Marie-Dominique, Rochelle-Newall, Emma, Schneider, Uta, Terbrueggen, Anja, Riebesell, Ulf·2005·Limnology and Oceanography

Abstract

We studied the direct effects of CO2 and related changes in seawater carbonate chemistry on marine planktonic organisms in a mesocosm experiment. In nine outdoor enclosures (~11 m3 each), the partial pressure of CO2 (pCO2) in the seawater was modified by an aeration system. The triplicate mesocosm treatments represented low (~190 parts per million by volume (ppmV) CO2), present (~410 ppmV CO2), and high (~710 ppmV CO2) pCO2 conditions. After initial fertilization with nitrate and phosphate a bloom dominated by the coccolithophorid Emiliania huxleyi occurred simultaneously in all of the nine mesocosms; it was monitored over a 19-day period. The three CO2 treatments assimilated nitrate and phosphate similarly. The concentration of particulate constituents was highly variable among the replicate mesocosms, disguising direct CO2-related effects. Normalization of production rates within each treatment, however, indicated that the net specific growth rate of E. huxleyi, the rate of calcification per cell, and the elemental stoichiometry of uptake and production processes were sensitive to changes in pCO2. This broad influence of CO2 on the E. huxleyi bloom suggests that changes in CO2 concentration directly affect cell physiology with likely effects on the marine biogeochemistry.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4319/lo.2005.50.2.0493

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 259

Metadata

Authors
Engel, A., Zondervan, I., Aerts, K., Beaufort, L., Benthien, A., Chou, L., Delille, B., Gattuso, J.-P., Harlay, J., Heemann, C., Hoffmann, L., Jacquet, S., Nejstgaard, J., Pizay, M.-D., Rochelle-Newall, E., Schneider, U., Terbrueggen, A., & Riebesell, U.
Venue
Limnology and Oceanography
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-03
Volume
50
Issue
2
Pages
493-507
ISSN
0024-3590 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2158544131
Cited by
259
References
2
FWCI
14.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Testing the direct effect of CO2 concentration on a bloom of the coccolithophorid Emiliania huxleyi in mesocosm experiments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4319/lo.2005.50.2.0493
The paper
Engel, A., Zondervan, I., Aerts, K., Beaufort, L., Benthien, A., Chou, L., Delille, B., Gattuso, J.-P., Harlay, J., Heemann, C., Hoffmann, L., Jacquet, S., Nejstgaard, J., Pizay, M.-D., Rochelle-Newall, E., Schneider, U., Terbrueggen, A., & Riebesell, U. (2005). Testing the direct effect of CO2 concentration on a bloom of the coccolithophorid Emiliania huxleyi in mesocosm experiments. Limnology and Oceanography. https://doi.org/10.4319/lo.2005.50.2.0493

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.