Next Article in Journal
Evidence for Ecosystem-Level Trophic Cascade Effects Involving Gulf Menhaden (Brevoortia patronus) Triggered by the Deepwater Horizon Blowout
Previous Article in Journal
The Role of Mesoscale Dynamics over Northwestern Cuba in the Loop Current Evolution in 2010, during the Deepwater Horizon Incident
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JMSE
Volume 9
Issue 2
10.3390/jmse9020189
jmse-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Satellite-Derived Protein Concentration of Phytoplankton in the Southwestern East/Japan Sea

by
Hyeonji Bae
1,
Dabin Lee
1,
Jae Joong Kang
1,
Jae Hyung Lee
1,
Naeun Jo
1,
Kwanwoo Kim
1,
Hyo Keun Jang
1,
Myung Joon Kim
1,
Yejin Kim
1,
Jae-Il Kwon
2 and
Sang Heon Lee
1,*
1
Department of Oceanography, Pusan National University, Geumjeong-gu, Busan 46241, Korea
2
Marine Disaster Research Center, KIOST, Busan 49111, Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9(2), 189; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse9020189
Submission received: 15 January 2021 / Revised: 4 February 2021 / Accepted: 9 February 2021 / Published: 11 February 2021
(This article belongs to the Section Marine Biology)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The cellular macromolecular contents and energy value of phytoplankton as primary food source determine the growth of higher trophic levels, affecting the balance and sustainability of oceanic food webs. Especially, proteins are more directly linked with basic functions of phytoplankton biosynthesis and cell division and transferred through the food chains. In recent years, the East/Japan Sea (EJS) has been changed dramatically in environmental conditions, such as physical and chemical characteristics, as well as biological properties. Therefore, developing an algorithm to estimate the protein concentration of phytoplankton and monitor their spatiotemporal variations on a broad scale would be invaluable. To derive the protein concentration of phytoplankton in EJS, the new regional algorithm was developed by using multiple linear regression analyses based on field-measured data which were obtained from 2012 to 2018 in the southwestern EJS. The major factors for the protein concentration were identified as chlorophyll-a (Chl-a) and sea surface nitrate (SSN) in the southwestern EJS. The coefficient of determination (r2) between field-measured and algorithm-derived protein concentrations was 0.55, which is rather low but reliable. The satellite-derived estimation generally follows the 1:1 line with the field-measured data, with Pearson’s correlation coefficient, which was 0.40 (p-value < 0.01, n = 135). No remarkable trend in the long-term annual protein concentration of phytoplankton was found in the study area during our observation period. However, some seasonal difference was observed in winter protein concentration between the 2003–2005 and 2017–2019 periods. The algorithm is developed for the regional East/Japan Sea (EJS) and could contribute to long-term monitoring for climate-associated ecosystem changes. For a better understanding of spatiotemporal variation in the protein concentration of phytoplankton in the EJS, this algorithm should be further improved with continuous field surveys.

1. Introduction

The southern area of the East Japan Sea (EJS) is well known for high primary productivity with various physical processes such as coastal upwelling, eddies, and sub-polar fronts [1,2,3,4]. These diverse physical processes sustain high primary productivity in the EJS. Recently, various changes in physical-chemical, and biological properties have been reported in the EJS. Particularly, a dramatic change in the vertical distribution of the chemical properties and sea surface temperature of winter and spring was observed in the southern EJS during the last few decades [4,5,6,7]. Phytoplankton physiology is dynamic and highly responsive to environmental conditions. Phytoplankton acclimates to changing environmental conditions by a complex reallocation of carbon and energy through metabolic pathways to optimize growth [8]. Indeed, some biological changes especially in phytoplankton responding to climate change have been studied locally and temporally by field research and remote-sensed ocean color data in the EJS. The timings and magnitudes of spring and fall blooms have been started earlier and weaker in the EJS [9,10]. Joo et al. [4] found a decreasing trend in the annual primary production for 1.3% each year in the EJS from 2003 to 2012 using MODIS-aqua satellite data. The species composition and the macromolecular composition of phytoplankton, which in turn are closely related to the variation of zooplankton biomass, can be adjusted to the changing environment [6,10]. Subsequently, these changes in phytoplankton could induce considerable alternations of the upper trophic levels. Jung et al. [11] reported the habitat changes and the decrease of fish caught have been observed in the EJS. Consequently, their biomass, species compositions, and the cellular macromolecular contents of phytoplankton could strongly impact the trophic balance within a marine ecosystem [12,13].
The macromolecular composition (e.g., proteins, carbohydrates, and lipids) of phytoplankton could provide significant information for their physiological and qualitative status. When environmental conditions are appropriate, primary production and growth rates of phytoplankton increase. A high carbon allocation into proteins is known as an indicator of a physiologically healthy condition of phytoplankton [14,15]. Proteins are more directly linked with basic functions of biosynthesis and cell division [16] and tend to be conserved through the food chains and harsh conditions such as low irradiance or low nutrients conditions on account of the high energetic cost of their synthesis [17,18]. Proteins are nitrogen-based substances and are produced through nitrogen intake [19,20]. Nitrogen is one of the main nutrients that can directly limit phytoplankton production in the ocean [21,22]. Normally, proteins provide nitrogen-sufficient food and essential amino acids that are not produced in the consumer’s body [23,24].
Over the past 20 years, starting with monitoring chlorophyll-a (Chl-a) concentration in 1997, various satellite-based approaches such as phytoplankton function types (PFTs) or phytoplankton size classes (PSCs), and primary production of phytoplankton have been developed and expanded for phytoplankton ecology from remote sensing ocean color data [4,25,26,27]. Since the protein concentration of phytoplankton has been conducted from discrete field measurements, no detailed information on the temporal and spatial variations in the protein concentration of phytoplankton is currently available in the EJS. Given that field measurements are often infrequent and inadequate for monitoring over large spatial scales, satellite-based estimates over large spatial and long-time scales would be invaluable for better understanding ecological conditions of phytoplankton and thus marine ecosystems responding to current/ongoing environmental changes. In this study, an empirical algorithm for the protein concentration of phytoplankton based on the field measurement data from various cruises was organized for the southwestern EJS to detect its temporal and spatial variation using the ocean-color data from satellite remote-sensing. The regional algorithm was developed by selecting major environmental factors through multiple linear regression analysis based on field-measured data from 2012 to 2018 in the southwestern EJS. The main objectives of this study were to develop a regional algorithm for protein concentration for phytoplankton based on field-measured data, to characterize the temporal and spatial distribution of protein concentration using ocean color data, and to find the main controlling factors in the southwestern EJS during the observation period from 2003 to 2019.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area and Sampling

The field-measured total Chl-a, particulate organic carbon (POC), sea surface nitrate concentration (SSN), sea surface temperature (SST), and protein concentrations of phytoplankton in the southwestern EJS were obtained from various research cruises from 2012 to 2018. The total number of field-measured protein concentrations was 205 stations, which are plotted in Figure 1, and the detailed information is summarized in Table 1.
Water samples for the total Chl-a, POC, SSN, SST, and protein concentration for phytoplankton were sampled from the surface layer using a rosette sampler with Niskin bottles. Samples for the total Chl-a were filtered through 25 mm GF/F filters (Whatman) and extracted in 90% acetone at 4 °C for 24 h, and the concentrations were measured using a 10-AU fluorometer (Turner Designs). POC was filtered on 25 mm GF/F filters and frozen immediately and measured for mass spectrometric analysis at the stable isotope facility of the University of Alaska Fairbanks, USA. Water samples for SSN were filtered through a 47 mm GF/F (Whatman), and filtered water samples (45 mL) were frozen at −80 °C in a 50 mL conical tube for later analysis. The concentrations of SSN were analyzed using an automated nutrient analyzer (Quaatro, Seal Analytical, Germany) from the manufacturer’s instruction in the National Institute of Fisheries Science (NIFS). SST was measured at each station and observation time with a Conductivity–Temperature–Depth Sensors (CTD). For the protein concentration of phytoplankton, the method of Lowry et al. [28] was used to measure the concentration [29]. Water samples were filtered through 47 mm GF/F filters (Whatman) and frozen at −80 °C until spectrometric analysis in the laboratory. The samples for the protein concentrations that were collected on filters were sliced and put into amber vials with Deionized water (1 mL) and alkaline copper solution (5 mL), and then ultra-sonicated for 20 min. The solutions were mixed with a vortex mixer and kept at room temperature for 10 min. Then, diluted Folin–Ciocalteu phenol reagent (0.5 mL) was added into each solution and kept at room temperature for 1 h 30 min. After this process, the samples were transferred to borosilicate glass tubes centrifuged at 3000 rpm for 10 min, and the supernatant for the solution was detected for the protein concentration with a UV spectrophotometer at 750 nm. The protein concentrations were calculated from calibration curves with a protein standard solution (2 mg·mL−1, SIGMA).

2.2. Development of the Protein Concentration Algorithm

The protein concentration algorithm for the southwestern EJS was empirically derived with our field-measured data. We used a total of 205 field-measured data for developing the regional algorithm for the protein concentration of phytoplankton. To identify how variables influence the protein concentration of phytoplankton, multilinear regression models were applied to the data using a stepwise variable section as follows:
Y = β0 + β1P1 + β2P2 + ⋯ + βnPn + ε
where Y is the dependent variable, which is the protein concentration of phytoplankton estimating from the independent variables, P1⋯Pn, which is Chl-a and SSN. The parameter β0 is constant. β1⋯βn are the regression coefficients for the predictors, and ε is the error term. Predictors in a multilinear regression model need to be independent of each other to yield correct results. Therefore, principal component analysis (PCA) was implemented by SPSS software version 12.0 program (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA) to find correlations and independence among the variables. Physical, chemical, and biological variables (SST, SSN, Chl-a, and POC) were applied to PCA. In addition, the stepwise variable selection method with F-test was used to confirm the predictors. The protein concentration of phytoplankton algorithm as a function of Chl-a and SSN is as follows:
PRT = 51.344 + 23.404 × Chl-a − 6.755 × SSN

2.3. Satellite Ocean Color Data

To estimate the satellite-derived protein concentration based on the protein-estimating algorithm, ocean color data were obtained from MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer)–Aqua by the OBPC (Ocean Biology Processing Group at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center; https://oceandata.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/MODIS-Aqua/). We used the monthly level-3 datasets including Chl-a and SST covering the EJS from January 2003 to December 2019 at 4 km of spatial resolution. A regional Sea Surface Nitrate (SSN) was calculated based on Chl-a and SST from ocean color data with the regional SSN algorithm [30]. Mixed layer depths of the EJS were obtained from ECCO (Estimating the Circulation and Climate of the Ocean; https://www.ecco-group.org/).

3. Result

3.1. Physical and Chemical Conditions in the EJS

From field studies from 2012 to 2018, a total of 205 data were obtained mainly from February to November (Table 1). During the overall research period, Chl-a, SSN, SST and PRT ranged from 0.05 to 10.4 µg·L−1 (mean ± S.D. = 1.23 ± 1.67 µg·L−1), 0.03 to 8.37 µM (mean ± S.D. = 2.25 ± 2.13 µM), 7.6 to 28.7 °C (mean ± S.D. = 19.6 ± 4.6 °C), and 3.2 to 454.2 µg·L−1 (mean ± S.D. = 76.5 ± 64.2 µg·L−1), respectively. Distinct seasonal variations were detected precisely in every environmental condition (Figure 2). The concentrations of Chl-a were high in spring and lower in summer (Figure 2a). The concentrations of SSN were high in winter and lower in other seasons (Figure 2b). SST was high in summer and autumn (Figure 2c). The protein concentration of phytoplankton was high in spring and autumn, lower in summer and winter (Figure 2d).

3.2. Derivation of Protein Concentration of Phytoplankton Algorithm in the EJS

Field-measured protein concentrations of phytoplankton were collected from several cruises from 2012 to 2018 for a regional protein algorithm in the EJS. Field-measured protein concentrations of phytoplankton ranged from 3.2 µg·L−1 to 454.2 µg·L−1 with an average of 74.9 µg·L−1 (S.D. = ±62.8 µg·L−1). To derive a regional algorithm for the phytoplankton protein concentration we used two variables which are Chl-a and SSN from field-measured data. The coefficient of determination (r2) between field-measured and algorithm-derived protein concentrations based on Chl-a concentrations was 0.25 (Figure 3a). An additional parameter of SSN induced a considerable increase in the r2 to 0.55 (Figure 3b and Table 2) indicating that nutrients would be an important contributor to control the protein concentration of phytoplankton. As a result of stepwise analysis of multilinear regression, SST as an additional factor was not selected because it does not significantly affect the protein concentration. Moreover, multilinear regression is based on the assumption of independence between variables; supplementary variables for POC that were not independent among the variables by the PCA were excluded in our algorithm analysis. The satellite-derived SSN concentration is calculated by SST and Chl-a, according to Joo et al. [30] algorithm. which is primarily controlled by SST. The Pearson’s correlation coefficient between Chl-a and SSN was 0.28 (p-value > 0.05), which suggests that they are independent.

3.3. Comparison of Algorithm-Derived Concentrations of Protein with Field-Measured Data

To estimate the protein concentration of phytoplankton by satellite, monthly Chl-a concentration and SST data from MODIS-aqua L3 were extracted from the same location, matched with the field-measured stations. The algorithm-derived estimation from MODIS-aqua retrieved-data and the field-measured data generally follow the 1:1 line; significant Pearson’s correlation coefficient was 0.40 and the p-value was < 0.01 with n = 135 (Figure 4). Most of the satellite-derived protein concentrations were plotted in the 95% prediction bounds. The root mean squared error (RMSE) and bias of the estimation were 49.9 and 15.7 µg·L−1. Three more metrics were calculated to verify the validity of the model outputs compared with the field data [31]. The median satellite-to-field ratio (median ratio) close to 1 implies how well the algorithm-matched and the field-measured data fit together. The median of the relative-percent differences (median RPD) indicates between the satellite and the field-measured distribution medians to quantify relative biases, and the semi-interquartile percent differences (SIQ-PD) quantify relative differences in distribution widths. These algorithms of median ratio, median PRD, and SIQ-PD are 1.07, 6.98, and −59.4, respectively. Through these metrics, our algorithm generally matched the field-measured protein concentrations, and the variability of the satellite-derived protein concentration was lower than the field-measured data (Figure 5a). The algorithm-derived estimation and the field-measured data with seasonal distribution of the protein concentration showed a more precise similar tendency (Figure 5b).

3.4. Spatial and Seasonal Variation in MODIS-Derived Protein Concentration

Based on our new regional algorithm, the MODIS-derived climatological monthly protein concentration pattern of phytoplankton was produced in the southwestern EJS from January 2003 to December 2019. The monthly protein concentration of phytoplankton based on monthly climatology images of the MODIS-derived protein concentration (Figure 6) ranged from 26.6 µg·L−1 (February 2018) to 138.2 µg·L−1 (April 2008) with an average of 54.1 µg·L−1 (S.D. = ±14.3 µg·L−1) from 2003 to 2019.
Generally, the protein concentration was lowest in the winter and early spring (January to March) in the study area. Around the Korean coastal regions, the concentration was relatively higher than offshore. The protein concentration peaked in April over the southwestern EJS. From May to June, the concentration slightly decreased and did not drop markedly like Chl-a or SSN concentration. During the period, a relatively higher protein concentration was continuously observed along the southwestern coastal region. From July to October the high concentrations were observed in the south of the coast and gradually spread to the north of the coast. Then, the protein concentration decreased again in November and December. This monthly pattern of the protein concentration is similar to the Chl-a pattern, which has bimodal peaks that occurred in spring and autumn previously reported in the EJS [5,7,32].

3.5. Long-Term Variation in MODIS-derived Protein Concentration

Time series of the monthly averages of MODIS-derived protein concentration of phytoplankton were generated in our study area from January 2003 to December 2019 (Figure 7). The highest protein concentration was 138.2 µg·L−1 in April 2008, and the lowest was 26.6 µg·L−1 in February 2018. The average of the highest concentration throughout the years was 79.9 µg·L−1 (±18.3 µg·L−1), whereas the average of the lowest concentration was 32.7 µg·L−1 (±4.1 µg·L−1) throughout the years. Generally, bimodal peaks were observed every year. The highest peaks were found in the spring seasons (April) and the second peaks occurred in the autumn seasons (September to November). But the highest peaks were in the autumn seasons and the second peaks were in spring seasons in some years (e.g., 2010–2014 and 2016). Otherwise, the lowest protein concentrations were observed in winter or early spring (January to March). The annual protein concentration of phytoplankton was plotted from 2003 to 2019 (Figure 8). The range of the annual protein concentration was 52.3 µg·L−1 in 2012 to 66.5 µg·L−1 in 2008 with an average of 57.7 µg·L−1 (S.D. = ±2.9 µg·L−1). There was no remarkable trend in the annual protein concentration of phytoplankton in the study area during our observation period.
Although no significant trend was found in the annual protein concentration of the phytoplankton, there was a notable difference in the seasonal distribution in protein concentration between the 3-year average of 2003–2005 period and 2017–2019 period (Figure 9). The 2017–2019 period of winter protein concentration (42.4 ± 1.9 µg·L−1) was significantly higher than the 2003–2005 period (34.0 ± 1.5 µg·L−1) (t-test, p < 0.01). Especially, the protein concentration in February was approximately 20 percent higher than in 2003–2005 period than in 2017–2019 period (t-test, p < 0.01). To find a major controlling factor for the difference in February between the two periods, physicochemical environmental conditions were analyzed with PCA (Table 3). The February protein concentration of phytoplankton was negatively correlated with mixed layer depth (r-value = −0.74, p < 0.001, n = 17) and SSN (r-value = −0.927, p < 0.000, n = 17), while positively correlated with SST (r-value = 0.85, p < 0.000, n = 17) and Chl-a concentration (r-value = 0.88, p < 0.000, n = 17).

4. Discussion

4.1. Majour Controlling Factors for the Protein Concentration of Phytoplankton

Multiple linear regression analyses were used to find major environmental factors controlling for the protein concentration of phytoplankton. The principal factors for the protein concentration were identified as Chl-a and SSN concentrations in the southwestern EJS. In other words, the protein concentration of phytoplankton might be considerably influenced by the Chl-a and SSN (Table 2), which are independent variables based on the multilinear regression analysis. The contribution of the Chl-a was larger than SSN, indicating that the Chl-a was a more critical factor for the protein concentration of phytoplankton in EJS. Given the results from the multilinear regression analysis, we expect that the enhanced Chl-a and the consumed SSN induce higher protein concentrations. Conventionally, the Chl-a concentration is strongly associated with the overall trend in the protein concentration of phytoplankton. Smit et al. [12] observed that proteins and Chl-a concentrations have a positive relationship. In addition, nitrogen is the constituent of protein and genetic materials. Nitrate, nitrite, ammonium, and dissolved organic nitrogen are the supplement of nitrogen. Normally, phytoplankton using nitrate as a nitrogen source requires nitrate reductase to synthesize the reduced organic nitrogen-compounds like proteins and amino acids, whereas no needed nitrate reductase for ammonium [20,33]. Hence, ammonium is preferred to phytoplankton, and thus, ammonium assimilation rate is normally higher than nitrate [34,35,36]. Ammonium is redistributed through reproduction by phytoplankton, while nitrate which is relatively difficult to supply is depleted and could be a limiting factor to phytoplankton [34]. Accordingly, the nitrate concentrations could influence the concentration of proteins. Under nitrate depletion, phytoplankton growth proceeds slowly and their photosynthetic production is decreased [37,38]. Previous studies have reported that photosynthesis may continue when the supply of nitrate is not sufficient, but the proportion of proteins which are nitrogen-rich components could be decreased whereas the proportions of lipids and carbohydrates which are more energy-rich components could be increased [39,40]. Therefore, it can be explained that the result of the algorithm, high Chl-a concentration, and intake of SSN has a great influence on the increase in protein concentration of phytoplankton.

4.2. The Spatial and Seasonal Variation in Protein Concentration of Phytoplankton in the EJS

The average MODIS-derived monthly protein concentration (54.1 ± 14.3 µg·L−1) in this study from 2003 to 2019 is somewhat lower compared to the average protein concentrations from Kang et al. [41] who reported 65.5 µg·L−1 (±27.1 µg·L−1) for fall 2012 and 74.6 µg·L−1 (±36.9 µg·L−1) for spring 2015 in the northern EJS based on their field measurements. Kang et al. [42] consistently observed similar protein concentrations in the EJS during April 2016 (71.4 ± 30.0 µg·L−1), as the spring protein concentration in Kang et al. [41]. Protein concentrations of phytoplankton have a seasonal pattern observed in the EJS from the time-series ocean color data from 2003 to 2019. High concentrations of protein were observed in spring and autumn; slightly lower protein concentrations were observed in summer and decreased sharply in winter, which is a typical seasonal distribution of phytoplankton growth along the season depending on environmental conditions [14]. The protein of phytoplankton appears to have high correlations with the growth rate of phytoplankton in the EJS [15]. However, the southwest part of the EJS has always a higher concentration in all seasons except winter. Consistently, relatively higher average protein concentration (85.2 ± 58.9 µg·L−1) was measured in the southwestern EJS based on monthly measurements from April to November 2014 [10]. It might be induced by the coastal upwelling which occurs frequently from spring to autumn as the monsoon wind changes its direction from northwesterly to southwesterly on the east coast of Korea [5]. Coastal upwelling enhances the primary production and the biomass of phytoplankton because of the increased nitrate supply and light ability to phytoplankton in the southwest of the EJS [4,43,44]. Hence, the high protein concentration in coastal regions could be influenced by coastal upwelling. Roy [25] reported that globally the protein concentrations in coastal regions were higher than those in open oceans, although the uncertainty remains high.

4.3. The Low Limit of Protein Concentration of Phytoplankton

From 2003 to 2019, the average of the lowest protein concentration of each year was 33.3 µg·L−1 (±4.69 µg·L−1), and the lowest protein concentration was 26.6 µg·L−1 in February 2018 (Figure 6). The lowest annual protein concentration was in winter, January and February, except one year (March 2010). In winter, the Asian winter monsoon prevailed with northerly winds in the EJS [5]. The wind stirring and surface cooling due to monsoons and winter convection results in deeper mixed layer depth (MLD) [45]. The deep MLD is a well-mixed condition, which can redistribute major inorganic nutrients to surface water. However, phytoplankton growth is mainly controlled by light availability during the winter season. The weak solar radiation and deep mixed layer in winter contribute to the low Chl-a concentration. Previous studies reported that the synthesis of proteins is relatively maintained under harsh environmental conditions which cause low biomass, production, and growth of phytoplankton [15,46]. Particularly in coastal waters, when primary production decreased, the synthesis of macromolecules was reduced, but protein synthesis was reduced less than other macromolecules such as carbohydrates and lipids [46]. In general, the conservation of protein synthesis implies that basic cellular functions are sustained in growth-limiting conditions. This pattern is robust and persistent over the entire annual cycle, despite the occurrence of major changes in the species composition of phytoplankton assemblages [19,46,47]. Therefore, when the growth conditions are not favorable like in winter, with low light availability, protein concentration is kept at a certain value, approximately 30 µg·L−1 in the southwestern EJS.

4.4. Recent Trend of Protein Concentration of Phytoplankton

Even if the annual protein concentration has no significant trend from 2003 to 2019, the average protein concentration for recent 3 years (2017–2019) in winter, specifically February, was 20 percent higher compared to that in the former period (2003–2005) (Figure 9). Generally, the lowest protein concentrations were in February of each year, except 2010 (March) and 2014 and 2019 (January). There might be some reasons for the increasing rates of protein concentration. A possible reason would the increase of SST in the EJS which has experienced a warming trend over recent decades according to previous reports [48,49]. The warming SST could lead to increase surface water stratification and consequently decrease the influx of major inorganic nutrients into the upper euphotic layer. Toseland et al. [50] found that SST affects the core metabolism of phytoplankton such as protein synthesis and RNA. Increasing SST can cause changes in phytoplankton physiological states to a high N:P ratio in phytoplankton cellular [50] and thus increase the protein synthesis rate. Indeed, the SST in February during the recent period (2017–2019) was higher (0.8 °C) than that during the former period (2003–2005). In this study, we found the protein concentration was strongly positively correlated with the SST during February (Table 3). Another possible reason could be MLD. MLD controls the availability of nutrients and lights to phytoplankton in the upper ocean [51,52]. The maximum MLD appears during the wintertime from November to March, especially February in this study period. In particular, winter mixing is essential to the water formation that determines the property of the thermocline water and connects the upper ocean to the deep ocean [53]. According to previous reports, the MLD has been decreased by reduced surface cooling and weaken wind stress in the EJS [45,54], which could affect the biomass, biochemical compositions, and primary production of phytoplankton. This study was found a negative correlation between MLD and protein concentration of phytoplankton in February (Table 3). The shallower MLD matched with an elevated protein concentration of phytoplankton in this study. Therefore, the increase in protein concentration of phytoplankton in winter is a result of a well-growing environment for phytoplankton by increased water temperature and shallowed MLD.

5. Summary and Conclusions

In this study, we estimated the protein concentration of phytoplankton using the regional algorithm from MODIS-derived ocean color data and determined the temporal and spatial variation of the protein concentration in the EJS from 2003 to 2019. Two environmental parameters (SST and Chl-a) were selected as major factors for the algorithm of phytoplankton protein concentration based on in situ data. The algorithm-derived estimation from MODIS-aqua retrieved-data and the field-measured data generally follow the 1:1 line, with a significant Pearson’s correlation coefficient which was 0.40 and the p-value was < 0.01 with n = 135. Based on the results, the monthly mean protein concentration of phytoplankton showed a strong seasonality in the EJS. The seasonal variation of protein concentrations has bimodal peaks that occurred in spring and autumn. Interestingly, the protein concentration has a low limit of approximately 30 µg·L−1 in the southwestern EJS since the protein synthesis is maintained in harsh conditions such as low phytoplankton biomass, production, and growth. The average annual protein concentration had no specific trend in the EJS over the observation period from 2003 to 2019. The winter protein concentration of phytoplankton was higher than before. This suggests that the protein concentration of phytoplankton in winter is more sensitive toward ongoing warming trends like increasing SST and shallowing MLD in the EJS. Approximately 55% of the prediction for the protein concentration of phytoplankton were obtained in this study based on surface Chl-a concentration and SSN in the EJS, which suggests that other parameters are needed to improve our algorithm. For example, the protein concentrations of phytoplankton could be strongly associated with size-specific Chl-a contributions. Indeed, higher protein concentrations were found in large-sized cells of phytoplankton compared to small cells in the EJS [42]. Therefore, different size compositions of phytoplankton rather than total Chl-a concentration should be considered for improving the algorithm derived in this study. Moreover, the lack of seasonal data in the EJS in December and January could be one of the potential reasons causing the bias and uncertainties of our algorithm although field-measured data for the protein concentrations from various cruises (Table 1) were used for this study. Other algorithms for carbohydrate and lipid concentrations of phytoplankton are highly recommended to understand the potential influence of global warming on the environmental conditions and consequently on phytoplankton ecology and thus the marine ecosystem in the EJS.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, H.B. and S.H.L.; methodology, H.B. and D.L.; validation, H.B. and D.L.; investigation, D.L., J.J.K., J.H.L., N.J., K.K., H.K.J., M.J.K. and Y.K.; data curation, H.B., D.L., J.J.K., J.H.L., N.J., K.K., H.K.J., M.J.K. and Y.K.; writing—original draft preparation, H.B.; writing—review and editing, S.H.L.; visualization, H.B.; supervision, S.H.L.; project administration, J.-I.K. and S.H.L.; funding acquisition, J.-I.K. and S.H.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by “Long-term change of structure and function in marine ecosystems of Korea” and “Improvements of ocean prediction accuracy using numerical modeling and artificial intelligence technology” funded by the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries, Republic of Korea.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers and the handling editors who dedicated their time to providing the authors with constructive and valuable recommendations.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Kang, Y.S.; Kim, J.Y.; Kim, H.G.; Park, J.H. Long-term changes in zooplankton and its relationship with squid, Todarodes pacificus, catch in Japan/East Sea. Fish. Oceanogr. 2002, 11, 337–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Kim, D.; Yang, E.J.; Kim, K.H.; Shin, C.-W.; Park, J.; Yoo, S.; Hyun, J.-H. Impact of an anticyclonic eddy on the summer nutrient and chlorophyll a distributions in the Ulleung Basin, East Sea (Japan Sea). ICES J. Mar. Sci. 2012, 69, 23–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Lim, J.-H.; Son, S.; Park, J.-W.; Kwak, J.H.; Kang, C.-K.; Son, Y.B.; Kwon, J.-N.; Lee, S.H. Enhanced biological activity by an anticyclonic warm eddy during early spring in the East Sea (Japan Sea) detected by the geostationary ocean color satellite. Ocean Sci. J. 2012, 47, 377–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Joo, H.T.; Park, J.W.; Son, S.H.; Noh, J.-H.; Jeong, J.-Y.; Kwak, J.H.; Saux-Picart, S.; Choi, J.H.; Kang, C.-K.; Lee, S.H. Long-term annual primary production in the Ulleung Basin as a biological hot spot in the East/Japan Sea. J. Geophys. Res. Ocean. 2014, 119, 3002–3011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Chang, K.-I.; Zhang, C.-I.; Park, C.; Kang, D.-J.; Ju, S.-J.; Lee, S.-H.; Wimbush, M. (Eds.) Oceanography of the East Sea (Japan Sea); Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; ISBN 978-3-319-22719-1. [Google Scholar]
  6. Chiba, S.; Toshiro, S. Interdecadal change in the upper water column environment and spring diatom community structure in the Japan Sea: An early summer hypothesis. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2012, 231, 23–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Lee, S.H.; Son, S.; Dahms, H.-U.; Park, J.W.; Lim, J.-H.; Noh, J.-H.; Kwon, J.-I.; Joo, H.T.; Jeong, J.Y.; Kang, C.-K. Decadal changes of phytoplankton chlorophyll-a in the East Sea/Sea of Japan. Oceanology 2014, 54, 771–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Geider, R.J.; Moore, C.M.; Ross, O.N. The role of cost–benefit analysis in models of phytoplankton growth and acclimation. Plant. Ecol. Divers. 2009, 2, 165–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Yamada, K.; Ishizaka, J.; Yoo, S.; Kim, H.-c.; Chiba, S. Seasonal and interannual variability of sea surface chlorophyll a concentration in the Japan/East Sea (JES). Prog. Oceanogr. 2004, 61, 193–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Jo, N.; Kang, J.J.; Park, W.G.; Lee, B.R.; Yun, M.S.; Lee, J.H.; Kim, S.M.; Lee, D.; Joo, H.T.; Lee, J.H.; et al. Seasonal variation in the biochemical compositions of phytoplankton and zooplankton communities in the southwestern East/Japan Sea. Deep Sea Res. Part II Top. Stud. Oceanogr. 2017, 143, 82–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Jung, H.K.; Rahman, M.S.; Kang, C.-K.; Park, S.-Y.; Lee, S.H.; Park, H.J.; Kim, H.-W.; Lee, C.I. The influence of climate regime shifts on the marine environment and ecosystems in the East Asian Marginal Seas and their mechanisms. Deep Sea Res. Part II Top. Stud. Oceanogr. 2017, 143, 110–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Smit, A.J.; Robertson, B.L.; Preez, D.R. Influence of ammonium-N pulse concentrations and frequency, tank condition and nitrogen starvation on growth rate and biochemical composition of Gracilaria gracilis. J. Appl. Phycol. 1996, 8, 473–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Litzow, M.A.; Bailey, K.M.; Prahl, F.G.; Heintz, R. Climate regime shifts and reorganization of fish communities: The essential fatty acid limitation hypothesis. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2006, 315, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. DiTullio, G.R.; Laws, E.A. Estimates of phytoplankton N uptake based on 14CO2 incorporation into protein. Limnol. Oceanogr. 1983, 28, 177–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Lee, S.H.; Kim, H.-J.; Whitledge, T.E. High incorporation of carbon into proteins by the phytoplankton of the Bering Strait and Chukchi Sea. Cont. Shelf Res. 2009, 29, 1689–1696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Geider, R.J.; MacIntyre, H.L.; Kana, T.M. A dynamic model of photoadaptation in phytoplankton. Limnol. Oceanogr. 1996, 41, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Marañón, E.; Fernández, E.; Anadón, R. Patterns of macromolecular synthesis by natural phytoplankton assemblages under changing upwelling regimes: In situ observations and microcosm experiments. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1995, 88, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Marañón, E.; González, N. Primary production, calcification and macromolecular synthesis in a bloom of the coccolithophore Emiliania huxleyi in the North Sea. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1997, 157, 61–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Morris, I. Photosynthetic products, physiological state, and phytoplankton growth. Can. B Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1981, 210, 83–102. [Google Scholar]
  20. Graham, L.; Graham, J.; Wilcox, L. Algae, 2nd ed.; Pearson Education Inc.: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2009; pp. 33–34. [Google Scholar]
  21. Reynolds, R.; Stramski, D.; Wright, V.; Woźniak, S. Measurements and characterization of particle size distributions in coastal waters. J. Geophys. Res. Ocean. 2010, 115, C08024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Vymazal, J. Algae and Element Cycling in Wetlands; Lewis Publishers Inc.: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  23. Scott, J. Effect of growth rate of the food alga on the growth/ingestion efficiency of a marine herbivore. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. UK 1980, 60, 681–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Lindqvist, K.; Lignell, R. Intracellular partitioning of 14CO2 in phytoplankton during a growth season in the northern Baltic. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1997, 152, 41–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Roy, S. Distributions of Phytoplankton Carbohydrate, Protein and Lipid in the World Oceans from Satellite Ocean Colour. ISME J. 2018, 12, 1457–1472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. IOCCG. Phytoplankton Functional Types from Space. In Reports of the International Ocean-Colour Coordinating Group (IOCCG); No 15; Sathyendranath, S., Ed.; International Ocean-Colour Coordinating Group (IOCCG): Dartmouth, NS, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  27. Mouw, C.B.; Hardman-Mountford, N.J.; Alvain, S.; Bracher, A.; Brewin, R.J.; Bricaud, A. A consumer’s guide to satellite remote sensing of multiple phytoplankton groups in the global ocean. Front. Mar. Sci. 2017, 4, 41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Lowry, O.H.; Rosebrough, N.J.; Farr, A.L.; Randall, R.J. Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent. J. Biol. Chem. 1951, 193, 265–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Bhavya, P.; Kim, B.K.; Jo, N.; Kim, K.; Kang, J.J.; Lee, J.H.; Ahn, S.H. A review on the macromolecular compositions of phytoplankton and the implications for aquatic biogeochemistry. Ocean Sci. J. 2019, 54, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Joo, H.; Lee, D.; Son, S.H.; Lee, S.H. Annual New Production of Phytoplankton Estimated from MODIS-Derived Nitrate Concentration in the East/Japan Sea. Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Werdell, P.J.; Bailey, S.W.; Franz, B.A.; Harding, L.W., Jr.; Feldman, G.C.; McClain, C.R. Regional and seasonal variability of chlorophyll-a in Chesapeake Bay as observed by SeaWiFS and MODIS-Aqua. Remote Sens. Environ. 2009, 113, 1319–1330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Zuenko, Y.; Selina, M.; Stonik, I. On conditions of phytoplankton blooms in the coastal waters of the north-western East/Japan Sea. Ocean Sci. J. 2006, 41, 31–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. McCarthy, J.J.; Taylor, W.R.; Taft, J.L. Nitrogenous nutrition of the plankton in the Chesapeake Bay. 1. Nutrient availability and phytoplankton preferences. Limnol. Oceanogr. 1977, 22, 996–1011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. McCarthy, J.J.; Wynne, D.; Berman, T. The uptake of dissolved nitrogen? Us nutrients by Lake Kinneret (Israel) microplanktorP. Limnol. Oceanogr. 1982, 27, 673–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Dortch, Q.; Postel, J.R. During upwelling off the Biochemical indicators of N utilization by phytoplankton Washington coast. Limnol. Oceanogr. 1989, 34, 758–773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Mallet, C.; Charpin, M.; Devaux, J. Nitrate reductase activity of phytoplankton populations in eutrophic Lake Aydat and meso-oligotrophic Lake Pavin: A comparison. In Oceans, Rivers and Lakes: Energy and Substance Transfers at Interfaces; Amiard, J.-C., Le Rouzic, B., Berthet, B., Bertru, G., Eds.; Amazon: Nantes, France, 1998; pp. 135–148. [Google Scholar]
  37. Chen, C.-Y.; Yeh, K.-L.; Aisyah, R.; Lee, D.-J.; Chang, J.-S. Cultivation, photobioreactor design and harvesting of microalgae for biodiesel production: A critical review. Bioresour. Technol. 2011, 102, 71–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Bona, F.; Capuzzo, A.; Franchino, M.; Maffei, M.E. Semicontinuous nitrogen limitation as convenient operation strategy to maximize fatty acid production in Neochloris oleoabundans. Algal Res. 2014, 5, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Jiang, Y.; Yoshida, T.; Quigg, A. Photosynthetic performance, lipid production and biomass composition in response to nitrogen limitation in marine microalgae. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2012, 54, 70–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Klok, A.J.; Martens, D.E.; Wijffels, R.H.; Lamers, P.P. Simultaneous growth and neutral lipid accumulation in microalgae. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 134, 233–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Kang, J.J.; Joo, H.; Lee, J.H.; Lee, J.H.; Lee, H.W.; Lee, D. Comparison of biochemical compositions of phytoplankton during spring and fall seasons in the northern East/Japan Sea. Deep Sea Res. Part II 2017, 143, 73–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Kang, J.J.; Jang, H.K.; Lim, J.-H.; Lee, D.; Lee, J.H.; Bae, H. Characteristics of Different Size Phytoplankton for Primary Production and Biochemical Compositions in the Western East/Japan Sea. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 11, 3306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Onitsuka, G.; Yanagi, T.; Yoon, J.H. A numerical study on nutrient sources in the surface layer of the Japan Sea using a coupled physical-ecosystem model. J. Geophys. Res. Ocean. 2007, 112, C05042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Yoo, S.; Park, J. Why is the southwest the most productive region of the East Sea/Sea of Japan? J. Mar. Syst. 2009, 78, 301–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Lim, S.; Jang, C.J.; Oh, I.S.; Park, J. Climatology of the mixed layer depth in the East/Japan Sea. J. Mar. Syst. 2012, 96–97, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Suárez, I.; Marañón, E. Photosynthate allocation in a temperate sea over an annual cycle: The relationship between protein synthesis and phytoplankton physiological state. J. Sea Res. 2005, 50, 285–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Halsey, K.H.; Jones, B.M. Phytoplankton strategies for photosynthetic energy allocation. Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 2015, 7, 265–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Kim, K.; Kim, K.R.; Min, D.H.; Volkov, Y.; Yoon, J.H.; Takematsu, M. Warming and structural changes in the East (Japan) Sea: A clue to future changes in global oceans? Geophys. Res. Lett. 2001, 28, 3293–3296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Jo, C.O.; Park, S.; Kim, Y.H.; Park, K.-A.; Park, J.J.; Park, M.-K.; Kim, K.-R. Spatial distribution of seasonality of SeaWiFS chlorophyll-a concentrations in the East/Japan Sea. J. Mar. Syst. 2014, 139, 288–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Toseland, A.; Daines, S.J.; Clark, J.R.; Kirkham, A.; Strauss, J.; Uhlig, C.; Leton, T.M.; Valentin, K.; Pearson, G.A.; Moulton, V.; et al. The impact of temperature on marine phytoplankton resource allocation and metabolism. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2013, 3, 979–984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Sverdrup, H. On conditions for the vernal blooming of phytoplankton. Cons. Int. Explor. Mer. 1953, 18, 287–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Yentsch, C. Estimates of ‘new production’ in the Mid-North Atlantic. J. Plankton Res. 1990, 12, 717–734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Hanawa, K.; Talley, L.D. Mode waters. Int. Geophys. Ser. 2001, 77, 373–386. [Google Scholar]
  54. Chang, P.-H.; Cho, C.-H.; Ryoo, S.-B. Recent changes of Mixed Layer Depth in the East/Japan Sea: 1994–2007. Asia Pac. J. Atmos. Sci. 2011, 47, 497–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Jmse 09 00189 g001 550
Figure 1. Field measurement stations in the East/Japan Sea (EJS) from 2012 to 2018. Dotted black lines indicate the domain for the study area.
Figure 1. Field measurement stations in the East/Japan Sea (EJS) from 2012 to 2018. Dotted black lines indicate the domain for the study area.
Jmse 09 00189 g001
Jmse 09 00189 g002 550
Figure 2. The monthly distribution of the field data, (a) is chlorophyll-a, (b) is sea surface nitrate, (c) is sea surface temperature, and (d) is protein concentration of phytoplankton.
Figure 2. The monthly distribution of the field data, (a) is chlorophyll-a, (b) is sea surface nitrate, (c) is sea surface temperature, and (d) is protein concentration of phytoplankton.
Jmse 09 00189 g002
Jmse 09 00189 g003 550
Figure 3. The validation of a regional algorithm for the phytoplankton protein concentration of phytoplankton. The linear relationship between field-measured and algorithm-derived protein concentrations of phytoplankton is (a) based on chlorophyll-a concentrations and (b) based on chlorophyll-a and sea surface nitrate concentrations. Black solid lines represent the 1:1 line.
Figure 3. The validation of a regional algorithm for the phytoplankton protein concentration of phytoplankton. The linear relationship between field-measured and algorithm-derived protein concentrations of phytoplankton is (a) based on chlorophyll-a concentrations and (b) based on chlorophyll-a and sea surface nitrate concentrations. Black solid lines represent the 1:1 line.
Jmse 09 00189 g003
Jmse 09 00189 g004 550
Figure 4. Linear relationship between the protein concentration of phytoplankton derived by the algorithm and field-measured data.
Figure 4. Linear relationship between the protein concentration of phytoplankton derived by the algorithm and field-measured data.
Jmse 09 00189 g004
Jmse 09 00189 g005 550
Figure 5. Boxplots comparing the field-measurements with satellite-derived based on the regional algorithm with total data (a) and seasonal distribution (b).
Figure 5. Boxplots comparing the field-measurements with satellite-derived based on the regional algorithm with total data (a) and seasonal distribution (b).
Jmse 09 00189 g005
Jmse 09 00189 g006 550
Figure 6. Climatological monthly averaged distribution of protein concentration of phytoplankton based on the MODIS-derived protein concentration from 2003 to 2019 in the EJS.
Figure 6. Climatological monthly averaged distribution of protein concentration of phytoplankton based on the MODIS-derived protein concentration from 2003 to 2019 in the EJS.
Jmse 09 00189 g006
Jmse 09 00189 g007 550
Figure 7. Time-series of monthly mean protein concentration of phytoplankton in East/Japan Sea (EJS) from January 2003 to December 2019.
Figure 7. Time-series of monthly mean protein concentration of phytoplankton in East/Japan Sea (EJS) from January 2003 to December 2019.
Jmse 09 00189 g007
Jmse 09 00189 g008 550
Figure 8. Long-Term pattern of the protein concentration of phytoplankton in the East/Japan Sea (EJS) from 2003 to 2019.
Figure 8. Long-Term pattern of the protein concentration of phytoplankton in the East/Japan Sea (EJS) from 2003 to 2019.
Jmse 09 00189 g008
Jmse 09 00189 g009 550
Figure 9. The seasonal distribution between 3 years average of protein concentration 2003–2005 period and 2017–2019 period, which were the oldest and latest data accessible from the MODIS-Aqua satellite.
Figure 9. The seasonal distribution between 3 years average of protein concentration 2003–2005 period and 2017–2019 period, which were the oldest and latest data accessible from the MODIS-Aqua satellite.
Jmse 09 00189 g009
Table
Table 1. Information for the field-measured data in the East/Japan Sea (EJS): sampling date, number of stations, and geographic position.
Table 1. Information for the field-measured data in the East/Japan Sea (EJS): sampling date, number of stations, and geographic position.
YearMonthNumber of StationsLongitude RangeLatitude Range
2012March8129.5° E–131.5° E35.2° N–38° N
July6
October6
2013January1129.4° E–131° E35.7° N–37.7° N
May5
June5
August12
September3
2014April4128.9° E–131.9° E35.2° N–37.9° N
May4
June11
July6
August7
September6
October9
November20
2015May13128.6° E–131.9° E36.5° N–38.3° N
June5
July10
November5
2016April8130.3° E–132.3° E37° N–38° N
2017May9129° E–131.65° E35.6° N–37.9° N
June3
2018February–March9128.8° E–131.3° E35.6° N–38.2° N
April10
August10
October10
Table
Table 2. The result of multilinear regression analysis for the protein concentration of phytoplankton in the EJS.
Table 2. The result of multilinear regression analysis for the protein concentration of phytoplankton in the EJS.
Included Independent VariablesRegression Coefficient (bk)Standard Error of bkStandardized Regression Coefficientt-Testp-ValueVIFR2 (%)
Constant51.445.844-8.8020.000 **
Chl-a23.4042.1420.67510.9260.000 **1.00848.7
SSN−6.7551.620−0.258−4.1690.000 **1.00855.3
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
Table
Table 3. The correlation between the protein concentration of phytoplankton with satellite-derived data of physical, chemical, and biological variables during February.
Table 3. The correlation between the protein concentration of phytoplankton with satellite-derived data of physical, chemical, and biological variables during February.
February (n = 17)PRTMLDSSNSSTChl-a
PRT1----
MLD−0.740
0.001 **		1---
SSN−0.927
0.0000 **		0.650
0.005 **		1--
SST0.851
0.000 **		−0.576
0.015 **		−0.981
0.000 **		1-
Chl-a0.877
0.000 **		−0.696
0.002 **		−0.633
0.006 **		0.500
0.041 *		-
PRT = protein concentration of phytoplankton, MLD = mixed layer depth, SSN = sea surface nitrate, SST = sea surface temperature, Chl-a = chlorophyll-a; * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Bae, H.; Lee, D.; Kang, J.J.; Lee, J.H.; Jo, N.; Kim, K.; Jang, H.K.; Kim, M.J.; Kim, Y.; Kwon, J.-I.; et al. Satellite-Derived Protein Concentration of Phytoplankton in the Southwestern East/Japan Sea. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 189. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse9020189

AMA Style

Bae H, Lee D, Kang JJ, Lee JH, Jo N, Kim K, Jang HK, Kim MJ, Kim Y, Kwon J-I, et al. Satellite-Derived Protein Concentration of Phytoplankton in the Southwestern East/Japan Sea. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering. 2021; 9(2):189. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse9020189

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bae, Hyeonji, Dabin Lee, Jae Joong Kang, Jae Hyung Lee, Naeun Jo, Kwanwoo Kim, Hyo Keun Jang, Myung Joon Kim, Yejin Kim, Jae-Il Kwon, and et al. 2021. "Satellite-Derived Protein Concentration of Phytoplankton in the Southwestern East/Japan Sea" Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 9, no. 2: 189. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse9020189

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop