Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Biology
BiologyBotanyMicrobiologyEntomologyEvolutionPaleontology
Chemistry
General ChemistryAnalytical ChemistryElectrochemistryOrganic Synthesis
Earth Science
GeologyMineralogyOceanographyMeteorologyEarthquakes
Physics
General PhysicsResearchRelativityParticle PhysicsElectromagnetismFusionOpticsAcousticsNew Theories

Natural Science Forum / Biology / Biology / October 2007



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Literature request: dioxygen in Earth's atmosphere

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
sanlosinst@yahoo.co.uk - 24 Oct 2007 12:15 GMT
Can anyone recommend me a good text on the generation and removal of
dioxygen in Earth's atmosphere? I'm looking for a book rather than a
journal article. My purpose is to get an idea of how environmental
destruction could affect Earth's atmosphere in the future.

My main questions are:
Which species produce the most dioxgen, and whereabouts on Earth's
surface do they live?
What environmental conditions are necessary for bulk dioxygen-
producing species to thrive?
Which dioxygen-producing species would continue to survive in adverse
environmental conditions which could foreseeably come about in the
next century?

I would prefer books that give solid numbers about amounts of dioxygen
produced, rather than vague statements like 'trees are important'. If
the books explain the basis for calculating these numbers that would
be even better.

At the same time, I would welcome recommendations of decent scientific
books giving projections of the likely future impact of human activity
on the environment in general, as long as these are based in solid
science.

To give you an idea of my level of technical understanding, I have
degrees in Biochemistry and Biophysics, and I used to develop methods
in analytical chemistry.

Thanks in advance, Samuel
Bob - 26 Oct 2007 04:31 GMT
>Can anyone recommend me a good text on the generation and removal of
>dioxygen in Earth's atmosphere? I'm looking for a book rather than a
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>degrees in Biochemistry and Biophysics, and I used to develop methods
>in analytical chemistry.

Interesting question. Some quick thoughts...

I think you would be better off with journal articles; this is likely
to be quite controversial, with differing and changing views. Journal
articles are more likely to give you the breadth of views, and to keep
you current.

To a first approximation, one might expect O2-evolution to follow CO2
consumption by plants. There is much debate about the latter. That may
be a hint of the complexity of your question. At least there are
numbers.

Remember, it is not simply O2-evolution that is of concern, but net O2
change, the result of the differential change of evolution and
consumption.

I'd suggest searching on something like
oxygen biogeochemical cycle
to start.

bob
hanson - 26 Oct 2007 05:01 GMT
ahahaha... AHAHAHA... listen to these 2 class 3 enviros whine.
If they are not typical classical 3 green turds then this must be
a prank  to which gentle green "bbx107" went for.... ahahahaha...
Listen: "removal of dioxygen in Earth's atmosphere"... ahahaha..
The solution to "sanlosinst"'s O2-problem who indeed appears
to be  losing it, is simple: See to it that all enviros stop breathing.
With that, this and all other enviro paranoias will disappear....
Thanks for the laughs you poor and self-dooming bastards.
Now read this and see which part of the enviro game you have
fallen victim to:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/70ed6372eccc32ba
ahahahaha... ahahahahanson

>>Can anyone recommend me a good text on the generation
>> and removal of dioxygen in Earth's atmosphere?
[quoted text clipped - 45 lines]
>
> bob
sanlosinst@yahoo.co.uk - 26 Oct 2007 10:17 GMT
> ahahaha... AHAHAHA... listen to these 2 class 3 enviros whine.
> If they are not typical classical 3 green turds then this must be
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> With that, this and all other enviro paranoias will disappear....
> Thanks for the laughs you poor and self-dooming bastards.

Have you read what I wrote in my original post? I'm trying to inform
myself about whether there is a real threat apparent from the
evidence, instead of just assuming that claims by political green
parties must be true.

You accuse people of falling for green scams based on lies. Then you
also condemn me for trying to find out what is really true. What
should I do, rather than trying to get informed about the real facts?

Samuel
David Bostwick - 26 Oct 2007 14:41 GMT
>> ahahaha... AHAHAHA... listen to these 2 class 3 enviros whine.
>> If they are not typical classical 3 green turds then this must be
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>
>Samuel

I think you should worry more about dihydrogen monoxide.  Breathing even a
small amount of it may kill you.  It's all over our food, even on "organic"
produce, and washing the produce still leaves a measurable residue.
hanson - 26 Oct 2007 15:39 GMT
> In article <1193390277.775890.25740@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
sanlosinst@yahoo.co.uk (Samuel) wrote:
>>> ahahaha... AHAHAHA... listen to these 2 class 3 enviros whine.
>>> If they are not typical classical 3 green turds then this must be
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>>> With that, this and all other enviro paranoias will disappear....
>>> Thanks for the laughs you poor and self-dooming bastards.

[Samuel]
>>Have you read what I wrote in my original post? I'm trying to inform
>>myself about whether there is a real threat apparent from the
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>> real facts?
>>Samuel

[Dave]
> I think you should worry more about dihydrogen monoxide.
> Breathing even a small amount of it may kill you.  It's all over our
> food, even on "organic" produce, and washing the produce
> still leaves a measurable residue.

[hanson]
ahahahaha... indeed, indeed... Shmuel ought to check the MSDS for
the toxicity and POTENTIAL (a classic green-must expression)
dangers and hazards of dihydrogen monoxide... ahahaha...
Also, notice how Samuel continued to whine in typical class 3 enviro
style?.... Notice how he snipped "Now read this and see which part
of the enviro game you have fallen victim to":
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/70ed6372eccc32ba
Samuel, the poor sod, shows all the ear marks of a self-tormented
class 3 enviro (defined in the above link). It is heart braking to
see what the class 1 & class 2 enviros did and do to otherwise
normal and intelligent people like Samuel.

On the larger scale, David, down in your knack of the woods the
sins of the green sh.t that these enviro bastards produced have
come home to roost.  Because of the natural current cyclical draught
in Georgia etc, people are made to suffer severely NOT because of
their scarce water resources, but because water is drained away
and wasted on some f.cking endangered mussels down stream.
I am glad to hear that Georgians are building new reservoirs
which will not be subject to such nazi green fanatical extremism.
Ergo,   *********  Enjoy chemistry... but f.ck enviros!   *********
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/70ed6372eccc32ba
ahahaha... ahahahahanson
HangEveryRepubliKKKan - 28 Oct 2007 03:55 GMT
UN issues 'final wake-up call' on population and environment
------------------------------------------------------------
By James Kanter - International herald Tribune - Thursday, October 25, 2007

PARIS: The human population is living far beyond its means and inflicting
damage on the environment that could pass points of no return, according to
a major report issued Thursday by the United Nations.

Climate change, the rate of extinction of species and the challenge of
feeding a growing population are among the threats putting humanity at risk,
the UN Environment Program said in its fourth Global Environmental Outlook
since 1997.

"The human population is now so large that the amount of resources needed to
sustain it exceeds what is available at current consumption patterns," Achim
Steiner, the executive director of the program, said in a telephone
interview. Efficient use of resources and reducing waste now are "among the
greatest challenges at the beginning of 21st century," he said.

The program described its report, which is prepared by 388 experts and
scientists, as the broadest and deepest of those that the UN issues on the
environment and called it "the final wake-up call to the international
community."

Over the past two decades the world population has increased by almost 34
percent to 6.7 billion from 5 billion; similarly, the financial wealth of
the planet has soared by about a third. But the land available to each
person on earth had shrunk by 2005 to 2.02 hectares, or 5 acres, from 7.91
hectares in 1900 and was projected to drop to 1.63 hectares for each person
by 2050, the report said.

The result of that population growth combined with unsustainable consumption
has resulted in an increasingly stressed planet where natural disasters and
environmental degradation endanger millions of humans, as well as plant and
animal species, the report said.

Steiner said that demand for resources was close to 22 hectares per person,
a figure that would have to be cut to between 15 and 16 hectares per person
to stay within existing, sustainable limits.

Persistent problems identified by the report include a rapid rise of
so-called dead zones, where marine life no longer can be supported because
of depletion of oxygen caused by pollutants like fertilizers. Also included
is the resurgence of diseases linked with environmental degradation.

The report is being published two decades after a commission headed by the
former Norwegian prime minister Gro Harlem Brundtland warned that the
survival of humanity was at stake from unsustainable development.

Steiner said many of the problems identified by the Brundtland Commission
were even more acute because not enough had been done to stop environmental
degradation as flows of goods, services, people, technologies and workers
had expanded, even to isolated populations.

He did, however, identify some reasons for hope that pointed toward better
environmental stewardship.

He said West European governments had taken effective measures to reduce air
pollutants, and he praised efforts in parts of Brazil to roll back
deforestation in the Amazon. He said an international treaty to tackle the
hole in the earth's ozone layer had led to the phasing-out of release of 95
percent of ozone-damaging chemicals.

Steiner said more intelligent management of scarce resources including
fishing grounds, land and water was needed to sustain a still larger global
population, which he said was expected to stabilize at between 8 billion and
10 billion people.

"Life would be easier if we didn't have the kind of population growth rates
that we have at the moment," Steiner said. "But to force people to stop
having children would be a simplistic answer. The more realistic, ethical
and practical issue is to accelerate human well-being and make more rational
use of the resources we have on this planet."

Steiner said environmental tipping points, at which degradation can lead to
abrupt, accelerating or potentially irreversible changes, would increasingly
occur in locations like particular rivers or forests, where populations
would lack the ability to repair damage because the gravity of a problem
would be far beyond their physical or economic means.

Looking ahead, Steiner said parts of Africa could reach environmental
tipping points if changing rainfall patterns stemming from climate change
turned semi-arid zones into arid zones, and made agriculture that sustained
millions of people much harder.

Steiner said other tipping points triggered by climate change could occur in
areas like India and China if Himalayan glaciers shrank so much that they no
longer supplied adequate amounts of water to populations in those countries.

He also warned of a global collapse of all species being fished by 2050, if
fishing around the world continued at its present pace.

The report said 250 percent more fish are being caught than the oceans can
produce in a sustainable manner, and that the number of fish stocks classed
as collapsed had roughly doubled to 30 percent globally over the past 20
years.

The report said that current changes in biodiversity were the fastest in
human history, with species becoming extinct a hundred times as fast as the
rate in the fossil record. It said 12 percent of birds were threatened with
extinction; for mammals the figure was 23 percent and for amphibians it was
more than 30 percent.

"Scientists now refer to a sixth major extinction crisis that's under way,"
Steiner said.

The first mass extinction, about 440 million years ago, and the four
succeeding extinctions were the result of physical shocks to the planet like
volcanic eruptions and plate tectonic shifts.

The report said that annual emissions of CO2 from fossil fuels have risen by
about one-third since 1987 and that the threat from climate change now was
so urgent that only very large cuts in greenhouse gases of 60 to 80 percent
could stop irreversible change.

The effects of global warming, like the melting ice in the Arctic are
"accelerating at a pace that goes beyond the scenarios and models we've been
using," Steiner said.

Climate change, however, was an issue that gained huge momentum over the
past year, with governments, industries and citizens increasingly seeking
solutions to the problem, Steiner said. The recent award of the Nobel Peace
Prize to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and to former Vice
President Al Gore was a sign of widespread scientific consensus that climate
change is under way, he said.

Steiner called for an accelerated effort on a far wider range of
environmental issues to build the same sense of urgency as shown on climate
change over the past year to address the worsening situations of
biodiversity, land degradation, fisheries and freshwater.

Many biologists and climate scientists have concluded that human activities
have become a dominant influence on the planet's climate and ecosystems. But
there is still a range of views on whether this could result in a
catastrophic unraveling of natural resources as the human population heads
toward nine billion by midcentury, or more of a steady diminution in
diversity.
HangEveryRepubliKKKan - 27 Oct 2007 02:33 GMT
> I think you should worry more about dihydrogen monoxide.  Breathing even a
> small amount of it may kill you.  It's all over our food, even on
> "organic"
> produce, and washing the produce still leaves a measurable residue.

Yup, water can be dangerous.  That's why Rush Limbaugh advises people to use
buckets with holes in them.  To assure that they can not get their heads
stuck inside while mopping the floor.
HangEveryRepubliKKKan - 28 Oct 2007 03:54 GMT
UN issues 'final wake-up call' on population and environment
------------------------------------------------------------
By James Kanter - International herald Tribune - Thursday, October 25, 2007

PARIS: The human population is living far beyond its means and inflicting
damage on the environment that could pass points of no return, according to
a major report issued Thursday by the United Nations.

Climate change, the rate of extinction of species and the challenge of
feeding a growing population are among the threats putting humanity at risk,
the UN Environment Program said in its fourth Global Environmental Outlook
since 1997.

"The human population is now so large that the amount of resources needed to
sustain it exceeds what is available at current consumption patterns," Achim
Steiner, the executive director of the program, said in a telephone
interview. Efficient use of resources and reducing waste now are "among the
greatest challenges at the beginning of 21st century," he said.

The program described its report, which is prepared by 388 experts and
scientists, as the broadest and deepest of those that the UN issues on the
environment and called it "the final wake-up call to the international
community."

Over the past two decades the world population has increased by almost 34
percent to 6.7 billion from 5 billion; similarly, the financial wealth of
the planet has soared by about a third. But the land available to each
person on earth had shrunk by 2005 to 2.02 hectares, or 5 acres, from 7.91
hectares in 1900 and was projected to drop to 1.63 hectares for each person
by 2050, the report said.

The result of that population growth combined with unsustainable consumption
has resulted in an increasingly stressed planet where natural disasters and
environmental degradation endanger millions of humans, as well as plant and
animal species, the report said.

Steiner said that demand for resources was close to 22 hectares per person,
a figure that would have to be cut to between 15 and 16 hectares per person
to stay within existing, sustainable limits.

Persistent problems identified by the report include a rapid rise of
so-called dead zones, where marine life no longer can be supported because
of depletion of oxygen caused by pollutants like fertilizers. Also included
is the resurgence of diseases linked with environmental degradation.

The report is being published two decades after a commission headed by the
former Norwegian prime minister Gro Harlem Brundtland warned that the
survival of humanity was at stake from unsustainable development.

Steiner said many of the problems identified by the Brundtland Commission
were even more acute because not enough had been done to stop environmental
degradation as flows of goods, services, people, technologies and workers
had expanded, even to isolated populations.

He did, however, identify some reasons for hope that pointed toward better
environmental stewardship.

He said West European governments had taken effective measures to reduce air
pollutants, and he praised efforts in parts of Brazil to roll back
deforestation in the Amazon. He said an international treaty to tackle the
hole in the earth's ozone layer had led to the phasing-out of release of 95
percent of ozone-damaging chemicals.

Steiner said more intelligent management of scarce resources including
fishing grounds, land and water was needed to sustain a still larger global
population, which he said was expected to stabilize at between 8 billion and
10 billion people.

"Life would be easier if we didn't have the kind of population growth rates
that we have at the moment," Steiner said. "But to force people to stop
having children would be a simplistic answer. The more realistic, ethical
and practical issue is to accelerate human well-being and make more rational
use of the resources we have on this planet."

Steiner said environmental tipping points, at which degradation can lead to
abrupt, accelerating or potentially irreversible changes, would increasingly
occur in locations like particular rivers or forests, where populations
would lack the ability to repair damage because the gravity of a problem
would be far beyond their physical or economic means.

Looking ahead, Steiner said parts of Africa could reach environmental
tipping points if changing rainfall patterns stemming from climate change
turned semi-arid zones into arid zones, and made agriculture that sustained
millions of people much harder.

Steiner said other tipping points triggered by climate change could occur in
areas like India and China if Himalayan glaciers shrank so much that they no
longer supplied adequate amounts of water to populations in those countries.

He also warned of a global collapse of all species being fished by 2050, if
fishing around the world continued at its present pace.

The report said 250 percent more fish are being caught than the oceans can
produce in a sustainable manner, and that the number of fish stocks classed
as collapsed had roughly doubled to 30 percent globally over the past 20
years.

The report said that current changes in biodiversity were the fastest in
human history, with species becoming extinct a hundred times as fast as the
rate in the fossil record. It said 12 percent of birds were threatened with
extinction; for mammals the figure was 23 percent and for amphibians it was
more than 30 percent.

"Scientists now refer to a sixth major extinction crisis that's under way,"
Steiner said.

The first mass extinction, about 440 million years ago, and the four
succeeding extinctions were the result of physical shocks to the planet like
volcanic eruptions and plate tectonic shifts.

The report said that annual emissions of CO2 from fossil fuels have risen by
about one-third since 1987 and that the threat from climate change now was
so urgent that only very large cuts in greenhouse gases of 60 to 80 percent
could stop irreversible change.

The effects of global warming, like the melting ice in the Arctic are
"accelerating at a pace that goes beyond the scenarios and models we've been
using," Steiner said.

Climate change, however, was an issue that gained huge momentum over the
past year, with governments, industries and citizens increasingly seeking
solutions to the problem, Steiner said. The recent award of the Nobel Peace
Prize to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and to former Vice
President Al Gore was a sign of widespread scientific consensus that climate
change is under way, he said.

Steiner called for an accelerated effort on a far wider range of
environmental issues to build the same sense of urgency as shown on climate
change over the past year to address the worsening situations of
biodiversity, land degradation, fisheries and freshwater.

Many biologists and climate scientists have concluded that human activities
have become a dominant influence on the planet's climate and ecosystems. But
there is still a range of views on whether this could result in a
catastrophic unraveling of natural resources as the human population heads
toward nine billion by midcentury, or more of a steady diminution in
diversity.
sanlosinst@yahoo.co.uk - 26 Oct 2007 10:12 GMT
> I think you would be better off with journal articles; this is likely
> to be quite controversial, with differing and changing views. Journal
> articles are more likely to give you the breadth of views, and to keep
> you current.

Unfortunately I no longer work in any scientific institution, so
getting journal articles is more difficult. Does anyone know where I
can find a free website that lets me search for journal articles?

> To a first approximation, one might expect O2-evolution to follow CO2
> consumption by plants. There is much debate about the latter. That may
> be a hint of the complexity of your question. At least there are
> numbers.

I get the impression that algae also make a big contribution,
particularly marine algae which flourish in open ocean at lower
temperatures. There's also the question of which plants are most
importnat and where on the earth they live. Some people claim that the
rain forests are the most important O2-producing areas while others
dispute this.

> I'd suggest searching on something like
> oxygen biogeochemical cycle
> to start.

I tried that for a while but I could only find books for
schollchildren.

Samuel
N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc) - 26 Oct 2007 17:57 GMT
Dear sanlosinst:

>> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 04:15:50 -0700, sanlosi...@yahoo.co.uk
>> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> Does anyone know where I can find a free website
> that lets me search for journal articles?

Google searches the articles, so at least you can identify
specifics of the publication, even if you cannot view the article
without paying.  A trip to a college (or really good public)
library will give you access to the article text.

>> To a first approximation, one might expect
>> O2-evolution to follow CO2 consumption by plants.
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> contribution, particularly marine algae which
> flourish in open ocean at lower temperatures.

Consider that the level of oxygen far from the ocean and near the
ocean (even out in the middle of the ocean) is pretty constant,
so marine algae, if it is making significant amounts of O2, is
doing it for the aquatic life.

> There's also the question of which plants are most
> importnat and where on the earth they live. Some
> people claim that the rain forests are the most
> important O2-producing areas while others dispute
> this.

Rainforests appear to be O2 neutral, much like the ocean.
However, when they are not present, or are decaying away, CO2 is
not being scrubbed... but released.

>> I'd suggest searching on something like
>> oxygen biogeochemical cycle
>> to start.
>
> I tried that for a while but I could only find books for
> schollchildren.

Add one or more more technical terms to your search, to thin out
the selection.  Adding "chloroplast" reduces the hits down from
400,000+ to ~30,000.

David A. Smith
sanlosinst@yahoo.co.uk - 27 Oct 2007 12:36 GMT
On Oct 26, 5:57 pm, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <dl...@cox.net>
wrote:
> Rainforests appear to be O2 neutral, much like the ocean.
> However, when they are not present, or are decaying away, CO2 is
> not being scrubbed... but released.

Do you have a reference for this?

Please let me underline: I am looking for literature. I've heard all
sorts of claims, and now I'd like to study the evidence for myself.

Samuel
N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc) - 27 Oct 2007 17:29 GMT
> On Oct 26, 5:57 pm, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)"
> <dl...@cox.net>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> I've heard all sorts of claims, and now I'd like to study
> the evidence for myself.

http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2000-08/965676157.Bt.r.html
... I'd ask this question on madsci.  Or at least review to see
if your question has not already been asked and answered.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropical_rainforest
... references section.

.edu sites waver between no net production and 40% net production
of atmospheric oxygen.

You might find some resources here:
http://www.ncsu.edu/bioresources/

www.springerlink.com
... seems to have several papers related to rainforests.  Not
that you can read them there without paying, but you can identify
the journals (and specific issues) that have the information you
seek.

I strongly urge you to find a good library, and quit holding your
hand out like a poor child.  Usenet is a pretty poor place to get
nothing but unvarnished truth.

Note also that production of cement (as used in making concrete)
is a very big net producer of CO2, and production (or at least
recycling) of aluminum (and probably other metals) is probably
close to oxygen neutral.

David A. Smith
Bill Penrose - 27 Oct 2007 03:52 GMT
On Oct 26, 1:12 am, sanlosi...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> Unfortunately I no longer work in any scientific institution, so
> getting journal articles is more difficult. Does anyone know where I
> can find a free website that lets me search for journal articles?

There are no free article websites, except the rapidly rising open-
access journals. Copyright limits prevent libraries from opening their
files indiscriminately.

There are several ways you can get free or nearly free access to
journals:

1. Visit a research university in person. Most have open stacks or
terminals where you can search their electronic records. For example,
the University of Arizona, near me, will let you walk in off the
street and use its terminals. They charge a dime a page for printing.
For an annual payment of $100, they will grant online access to
journals and allow borrowing of books and reports. You can also sign
up for a one-credit course and get library access, although it will
cost more.

2. Use the librarian in your local public library. Librarians are
trained in literature searching, but typically don't get to use these
skills if they work in local and branch libraries. Many have an
underused budget for online searching and interlibrary loans.

3. If you have a former connection with a university, as employee or
student, you can often get online access just by asking. When I
retired from my institution, I was able to keep my email account and
my library access.

4. For recent papers, write directly to the authors and ask for
reprints. Most will oblige.

Dangerous Bill
Bob - 27 Oct 2007 18:30 GMT
>> I think you would be better off with journal articles; this is likely
>> to be quite controversial, with differing and changing views. Journal
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>getting journal articles is more difficult. Does anyone know where I
>can find a free website that lets me search for journal articles?

PubMed

Scirus

Google Scholar

Try them. PubMed and Scirus give you abstracts online. Scirus can also
give you some good web sites.

Can you get to a univ library? Bill Penrose gave an example of how
access can work. Details vary, so you need to check. At Univ Calif,
access is even better than what he describes, in some ways. Asking is
a big step.

As to journals free online, it varies. Journals are experimenting with
policies (trying to balance providing access and making money, I
suppose).  Some journals open their backfile for free access 12 months
after publication. Some allow access to new articles. It varies. Just
go look.

As some examples: PNAS allows access to articles more than a few
months old, as does Science -- but the Science file goes back only to
1997. Nucleic Acid Research is now completely open access. In one case
recently, I wanted an article -- and found it... just happened to be
in the one issue the journal had posted as a free sample. (Obscure
journal, to which we did not subscribe.) Just go look.

If you have been away from library research for a while, you will be
surprised at how good online searching and online access has become.

>> To a first approximation, one might expect O2-evolution to follow CO2
>> consumption by plants. There is much debate about the latter. That may
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>particularly marine algae which flourish in open ocean at lower
>temperatures.

Yes, yes. Ordinary photosynthesis -- I meant algae to be included with
plants in this context.

The point is that O2 and CO2 are intricately connected biologically.
Atmospheric levels of O2 are orders of magnitude higher than for CO2,
so it is CO2 that is much more sensitive to the biological effects.

>There's also the question of which plants are most
>importnat and where on the earth they live. Some people claim that the
>rain forests are the most important O2-producing areas while others
>dispute this.

Right; that illustrates why books are risky on this topic.

>> I'd suggest searching on something like
>> oxygen biogeochemical cycle
>> to start.
>
>I tried that for a while but I could only find books for
>schollchildren.

I meant... search an article database with those terms. Even Google
Scholar. (Sometimes Google will usefully give scientific stuff; hard
to predict.)

But it is good to hear that biogeochemistry books are now being aimed
at school children. :-)

bob
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.