Prospects for biological evolution on Hycean worlds

Emily G. Mitchell; Nikku Madhusudhan

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Prospects for biological evolution on Hycean worlds

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A 10 K warmer ocean double the pace of evolution on Hycean worlds.

desk verdict A transparent MTE calculation that maps Hycean ocean temperature to clade origination times—useful for target selection, but the headline numbers and DMS story hinge on an activation energy they never vary. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.07872 v1 pith:MRUCF2JG submitted 2025-02-11 astro-ph.EP

Emily G. Mitchell , Nikku Madhusudhan This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.EP

keywords Hyceanworldsmetabolictheoryofecologyevolutionaryratesoriginationtimesdimethylsulphidebiosignaturesexoplanetsmicrobiallife

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper asks how fast microbial life could evolve in the oceans of Hycean worlds—planets with ocean-covered surfaces and hydrogen-rich atmospheres—if the starting point is Earth-like unicellular life. Using the metabolic theory of ecology, it translates a planet's median ocean surface temperature into an evolutionary rate, then integrates that rate along a time-calibrated tree of life to predict when major groups of unicellular organisms would originate. The central result is that a modest 10 K increase in ocean temperature more than doubles evolutionary rates, so all major unicellular groups and key phytoplankton groups could appear within about 1.3 billion years of life's origin. A comparable 10 K decrease delays most groups by several billion years, which would weaken the atmospheric biosignatures, such as dimethyl sulphide, that a Hycean biosphere could produce.

What carries the argument

The central object is the temperature-corrected metabolic rate from the metabolic theory of ecology, $\bar{B} = b_0 M^{\beta} e^{-E/(kT)}$, with $\beta=-1/4$, $E=0.65$ eV, and $b_0$ chosen for unicellular organisms. The paper uses this as a proxy for mutation rate $\alpha \propto \bar{B}$ (following Allen et al. 2006), so that the number of neutral nucleotide substitutions accumulated along an ancestral lineage is an integral of $\bar{B}$ over time. Origination of a clade occurs when the cumulative substitutions along its ancestral branches reach the total number the clade required on Earth, calibrated from molecular-clock origination times and Earth's median surface-temperature history.

What would settle it

Compare model predictions against a planet whose ocean temperature and host-star age are known: a Hycean world 10 K warmer than Earth's median ocean temperature is predicted to produce eukaryotic DMS-producing phytoplankton within ~1.3 Gyr of life's origin; if atmospheric observations of such a planet at an age much older than that show no DMS or other phytoplankton products, the neutral-mutation calibration or the MTE temperature scaling would be falsified. A more direct test would be laboratory evolution experiments on unicellular organisms at 10 K temperature increments to check whether mutation rates follow the MTE exponential with the assumed 0.65 eV activation energy.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that the evolutionary pace of unicellular life in an ocean world is extraordinarily sensitive to surface temperature, because metabolic rates scale exponentially with temperature. Modeled with the metabolic theory of ecology and calibrated to Earth's temperature history and molecular-clock origination times, the authors find that a +10 K shift in median ocean temperature makes evolutionary rates about 2.3 times faster at the time of life's origin and shifts the origination of all major unicellular clades to within ~1.19 Gyr after origin of life (key phytoplankton groups within ~1.28 Gyr). A −10 K shift halves rates and pushes the origination of most groups beyond ~4 Gyr, so a cooler Hycean world would likely host only Bacteria and Archaea after billions of years, with little to no eukaryotic DMS production. The paper frames these predictions as a baseline under conservative neutral-evolution assumptions, not as a claim that Hycean life exists.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the cumulative number of neutral mutations needed for a given group to originate is the same on Hycean worlds as it was on Earth, with the Earth values taken from molecular-clock dates and temperature history; if Hycean evolution requires different amounts of change, or if those Earth-calibrated mutation counts are wrong, the predicted origination times and biosignature implications would not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Warmer Hycean planets, including most currently known candidates, could host the full suite of major unicellular groups—including eukaryotic phytoplankton—within about a billion years of life's origin.
Cooler Hycean worlds would remain in a Bacteria-and-Archaea-only state for several billion years, so biosignature searches on such planets should either target older host stars or expect weaker dimethyl sulphide signals.
The origination times of the longest-delayed groups, especially eukaryotic DMS producers, are the most compressed by warming, making the DMS biosignature a sensitive indicator of evolutionary pace.
Because Hycean candidates are generally warmer than Earth, microbial biospheres could become detectable earlier in a planet's history than on Earth, provided life originates at all.
The results apply only to unicellular life; extending them to multicellular animals would require additional parameterization beyond the current model.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The model's logarithmic sensitivity to temperature implies that small uncertainties in retrieved ocean temperature translate into large uncertainties in predicted biosphere complexity, so precise thermal characterization should be a priority for Hycean targets.
The relative ordering of planets by temperature is more robust than the absolute origination times, suggesting that even if the Earth calibration is imperfect, comparing Hycean worlds by temperature could still predict relative biosignature strength.
Testing the assumed 0.65 eV activation energy directly in laboratory evolution experiments on unicellular organisms across 10 K temperature steps would validate or falsify the exponential temperature dependence that drives all the conclusions.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Emily, here's my read on Mitchell & Madhusudhan's Hycean evolution paper. The headline result—that +10 K can compress the origination of all major unicellular groups, including DMS-producing phytoplankton, into ~1.3 Gyr—is genuinely new as a calculation, and it's the kind of thing people doing JWST target selection will want to know. The paper gives the MTE machinery its due, uses a consistent TimeTree calibration, and checks robustness against a newer phylogeny (Moody et al. 2024). The limitations section is unusually honest: they flag single-species proxies, the 0-40°C thermal envelope, and the unresolved early-Earth temperature uncertainty.

But the quantitative claims are more fragile than the abstract suggests. The 'over twice' rate at +10 K comes straight from an activation energy E=0.65 eV, which the paper itself states can range 0.2–1.2 eV. At E=0.2 eV that factor drops to ~1.3; at E=1.2 eV it's ~4.5. No sensitivity analysis is done on E, so the ~1.19/1.28/1.29 Gyr origination times and the whole DMS-timing narrative inherit that uncertainty. The abstract also says 'over twice' as though it were the typical rate; the model's own Figure 2 shows the factor at +10 K falls from 2.3 at t=0 to 1.27 today, with a mean of 1.45. That's an overstatement in the paper's own terms.

The deeper assumption—the cumulative neutral mutation count to each clade is fixed by Earth's calibration—is explicitly stated but unvalidatable, and the biosignature conclusion ('cooler Hyceans show weaker DMS') is only as strong as that assumption. Still, the paper is transparent about it, and the qualitative conclusion that warmer oceans accelerate microbial evolution was already in Lingam & Loeb; the contribution here is the quantitative mapping.

Bottom line: this deserves refereeing. Not because I believe the specific times, but because the framework is simple, falsifiable, and directly relevant to observational programs. The referee should demand a sensitivity analysis over E and early-Earth temperature, and a redrawn abstract that distinguishes the t=0 rate from the time-averaged rate. With those changes the conditional accept could become a solid one. Without them, the headline numbers will be quoted out of context.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This manuscript applies the metabolic theory of ecology to estimate how a uniform shift in ocean temperature changes neutral mutation rates and, in turn, the origination times of major unicellular clades. Using Earth's reconstructed median surface temperature history and molecular-clock divergence dates, the authors calibrate the cumulative number of mutations needed for clade origination on Earth, then recompute origination times for temperature offsets of ±5, ±10, and ±15 K. They find that a +10 K offset roughly doubles evolutionary rates and pulls all modeled unicellular groups, including key DMS-producing phytoplankton, back to within ~1.3 Gyr of the origin of life, while a -10 K offset delays them by several gigayears. The paper connects these delays to the strength of atmospheric biosignatures such as dimethylsulfide on Hycean worlds.

Significance. If the underlying assumptions are accepted, this is a useful and transparent baseline for exoplanet biosignature interpretation: it quantifies a temperature-dependent evolutionary clock and gives a falsifiable mapping from ocean temperature to expected biosphere complexity and DMS detectability. The paper's strengths are its use of empirical Earth data, its explicit neutral-model assumption, its conservative restriction to unicellular organisms, and its internal check against an alternative recent phylogeny (Moody et al. 2024). The model is not claimed to include ecological interactions, multicellularity, or non-Earth-like biochemistry. The main weakness is that the abstract's quantitative claims are not accompanied by a sensitivity analysis for the activation energy and other calibrated inputs.

major comments (3)

[Section 3, Eq. (1); Section 4.1; Abstract] The headline claim that a 10 K increase leads to 'over twice' the evolutionary rates, and the specific origination times (e.g., ~1.19 Gyr for major groups), are computed with the activation energy E = 0.65 eV, but the paper itself states in Section 3 that E can vary between 0.2 and 1.2 eV. At T ~ 300 K the 10 K Arrhenius factor is about 2.2 for E = 0.65 eV, but only about 1.3 for E = 0.2 eV and about 4.5 for E = 1.2 eV. Since Eq. (1) is the only temperature dependence and the origination times are obtained by integrating it along ancestral branches, the abstract's quantitative claims are not robust to the stated range of E. Please add a sensitivity analysis (for example, separate curves in Figures 2 and 4 for E = 0.2, 0.65, and 1.2 eV) and revise the abstract and Section 5 to quote a range rather than a single factor.
[Section 3; Appendix A] The central extrapolation assumes that the cumulative number of neutral mutations required for each clade to originate is identical on Hycean worlds and on Earth, with the Earth values calibrated from TimeTree and Earth's temperature history. This quantity is the total mutation count alpha_T integrated in Section 3, and every origination time in Figure 4 depends on it; if Hycean evolution requires a different mutation load, or if the molecular-clock dates used for calibration are systematically biased, the predicted times and the DMS implications shift correspondingly. The manuscript should present these numbers as explicitly conditional on this Earth-like assumption, state the assumption in the abstract, and ideally show how the +10 K times change when alpha_T is varied within a plausible range (for example, a factor of two).
[Section 4.3; Section 5.1] The move from origination times of DMS-producing phytoplankton to statements about 'stronger atmospheric biosignatures' is an interpretive leap: the model estimates when clades first originated, not their biomass, the emission flux of DMS, or its atmospheric abundance. The qualitative direction (warmer planets host DMS producers earlier) follows, but the conclusion that warmer Hycean worlds 'are more likely to show stronger atmospheric biosignatures' should be flagged as a hypothesis requiring a coupled biosphere-atmosphere model rather than presented as a direct result of the calculation.

minor comments (6)

[Section 4.1; Figure 2] The model organism is called 'Aquifix' in the text of Section 4.1 but 'Aquifex' in Table 1; please use one spelling consistently.
[Figure 3] The caption says that color indicates evolutionary rates at the nodes, but no color bar or scale is shown; please add one.
[Figures 2 and 4] The figure captions do not label the axes; please add axis labels and units (for example, 'Time since origin of life (Gyr)' and 'Normalized evolutionary rate').
[Table 1] The text uses 'Alphaproteobacteria' while the table heading reads 'Alphaproterobacteria'; please standardize the spelling.
[Section 5] The sentence 'a decrease of 10 K halves them' is not consistent with the factors quoted in Section 4.1 (about 40% at t = 0 and a mean of 24% of the Earth rate); please reword to 'more than halves' or quote the factors explicitly.
[Data Availability] The paper states that no new data were generated, but a supplementary table of the computed origination times for all clades and all temperature offsets would aid reproducibility and allow readers to use the results without digitizing Figure 4.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

The evolutionary-rate and origination-time predictions follow from an externally calibrated MTE Arrhenius model, not from a circular fit; self-citations to Hycean-world papers are present but not load-bearing.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained as a model extrapolation. Equation (1), B = b0 M^beta exp(-E/kT), is taken from the metabolic theory of ecology with parameters adopted from Brown et al. (2004) and Allen et al. (2006); the mutation-rate relation alpha = alpha0 B is likewise an input from the literature. The cumulative number of substitutions required for each clade is calibrated from Earth molecular-clock origination times (Kumar et al. 2022; Wang & Luo 2021) and Earth temperature history (Krissansen-Totton et al. 2018). Hycean predictions are then obtained by integrating the same temperature-dependent rate under shifted median temperatures until the Earth-calibrated substitution totals are reached. No Hycean observable is used to fit any parameter, and the predicted originations at +10 K are not equivalent by construction to the Earth calibration. The abstract's 'over twice the evolutionary rates' for a 10 K increase is a direct numerical consequence of the assumed Arrhenius factor with E = 0.65 eV; the paper's own statement that E can range from 0.2 to 1.2 eV, and the absence of a propagated sensitivity analysis, is a robustness or uncertainty concern rather than a circularity. Self-citations to Madhusudhan et al. (2021, 2023a,b) establish the Hycean-world context and the non-limiting-resources assumption, but the evolutionary model does not depend on those citations for its quantitative outputs. Accordingly, no circular step is identified; at most there is minor, non-load-bearing self-citation in the framing assumptions.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 9 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model uses empirical constants from prior literature as inputs (E=0.65 eV, beta=-1/4, ln b0=15.85) and Earth-calibrated mutation counts; no parameters are fitted in this work. The main free input is the temperature offset, which is a scenario variable rather than a fitted parameter. The listed axioms are the load-bearing premises of the model.

assumptions (9)

domain assumption Life has originated on the Hycean world
Assumption 1 in Section 3; the model starts from the Origin of Life as a given.
domain assumption Elements and resources are not limiting
Assumption 2 in Section 3, based on Madhusudhan et al. 2021.
ad hoc to paper Speciation leads to origination of new clades similar to Earth's oceans
Assumption 3 in Section 3; needed to map Earth's clade origination pattern onto Hycean worlds.
domain assumption Planetary temperature is not significantly changed by organisms
Assumption 4 in Section 3.
domain assumption Neutral evolution models capture macroevolutionary patterns
Used to justify the model; cites Budd & Mann 2020 and Mitchell et al. 2019.
domain assumption Mutation rate is proportional to metabolic rate (Eq 2)
Relationship from Allen et al. 2006, used to convert metabolic rate to evolutionary rate.
ad hoc to paper The same cumulative number of mutations is required for clade origination on Hycean worlds as on Earth
Core assumption in Section 3 and Appendix A; Earth-calibrated mutation counts are applied unchanged to Hycean worlds.
ad hoc to paper Earth's median surface temperature history with a constant offset represents Hycean ocean temperatures
The paper applies a constant shift to Krissansen-Totton et al. 2018 temperatures throughout the planetary history.
domain assumption Origination times from molecular clock studies are accurate
Node origination times from Kumar et al. 2022 and Wang & Luo 2021 are used as inputs; these have large uncertainties.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Prospects for biological evolution on Hycean worlds." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MRUCF2JG

@misc{pith2026250207872,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Prospects for biological evolution on Hycean worlds},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MRUCF2JG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.07872}
}

abstract

Recent detections of carbon-bearing molecules in the atmosphere of a candidate Hycean world, K2-18 b, with JWST are opening the prospects for characterising potential biospheres on temperate exoplanets. Hycean worlds are a recently theorised class of habitable exoplanets with ocean covered surfaces and hydrogen-rich atmospheres. Hycean planets are thought to be conducive for hosting microbial life under conditions similar to those in the Earth's oceans. In the present work we investigate the potential for biological evolution on Hycean worlds and their dependence on the thermodynamic conditions. We find that a large range of evolutionary rates and origination times are possible for unicellular life in oceanic environments for a relatively marginal range in environmental conditions. For example, a relatively small (10 K) increase in the average ocean temperature can lead to over twice the evolutionary rates, with key unicellular groups originating as early as $\sim$1.3 billion years from origin of life. On the contrary, similar decreases in temperatures can also significantly delay the origination times by several billion years. This delay in turn could affect their observable biomarkers such as dimethylsulfide, which is known to be produced predominantly by Eukaryotic marine phytoplankton in Earth's oceans. Therefore, Hycean worlds that are significantly cooler than Earth may be expected to host simpler microbial life than Earth's oceans and may show weaker biosignatures, unless they orbit significantly older stars than the Sun. Conversely, Hycean worlds with warmer surface temperatures than Earth are more likely to show stronger atmospheric biosignatures due to microbial life if present.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.07872 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Bulk properties of temperate sub-Neptune exoplanets. The circles with uncertainties show a selected sample of temperate sub-Neptune exoplanets with confirmed measurements of radii and masses, with uncertainties below 2 earth masses, and zero-albedo equilibrium temperatures (Teq) below 600 K. The circles are color-coded by Teq as denoted by the color bar. The dashed lines show theoretical mass-radius curves of model… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Effect of temperature on normalised evolutionary rate for an analogue LUCA methanogen on Earth. Cases with increased temperatures by +5 K, +10 K and +15 K, relative to Earth, are shown in different shades of red, and cases with decreased temperatures of -5 K, -10 K and -15 K, relative to Earth, are shown in blue. t = 0 is set to when life is inferred to have originated, and the evolutionary rates normalised such th… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Time-calibrated phylogenetic trees with calculated evolutionary rates at Earth’s median temperature (top) and at +10 K increase relative to Earth (bottom) with the colour indicating the evolutionary rates at the nodes. ria, originated relatively recently, 3.9 Gyr after OoL (Kumar et al. 2022). In particular, these later three groups are also the key DMSproducing phytoplankton in the present day oceans (Hopkins et a… view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (1 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Effect of temperature on origination times of major clades given in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. OpenAlex reports about 6 citations worldwide. Full citation record

A generalised microbial cell model for methane biosignature predictions
astro-ph.EP 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A diffusion-limited microbial cell model predicts that smaller, longer-lived methanogens produce stronger methane biosignatures, and competition should drive alien life toward these traits.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

80 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

P., Gillooly J

Allen A. P., Gillooly J. F., Savage V. M., Brown J. H., 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103, 9130

work page 2006
[2]

O., 1990, Marine chemistry, 30, 1

Andreae M. O., 1990, Marine chemistry, 30, 1

work page 1990
[3]

K., Irwin P

Barstow J. K., Irwin P. G. J., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/slw109 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.461L..92B 461, L92

doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slw109 2016
[4]

H., Gillooly J

Brown J. H., Gillooly J. F., Allen A. P., Savage V. M., West G. B., 2004, Ecology, 85, 1771

work page 2004
[5]

J., de Pedro M

Brown P. J., de Pedro M. A., Kysela D. T., Van der Henst C., Kim J., De Bolle X., Fuqua C., Brun Y. V., 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109, 1697

work page 2012
[6]

E., Mann R

Budd G. E., Mann R. P., 2020, Science Advances, 6, eaaz1626

work page 2020
[7]

M., Glasgow Jr H

Burkholder J. M., Glasgow Jr H. B., 1997, Limnology and Oceanography, 42, 1052

work page 1997
[8]

J., 1997, Paleobiology, 23, 247

Butterfield N. J., 1997, Paleobiology, 23, 247

work page 1997

Show all 80 references

[9]

J., GAMBACORTA A., ANTRANIKIAN G., 1998, International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, 48, 1181

Canganella F., JONES W. J., GAMBACORTA A., ANTRANIKIAN G., 1998, International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, 48, 1181

1998
[10]

Cavalier-Smith T., 2017, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 372, 20150476

2017
[11]

V., Lax G., Prokina K

Cho A., Tikhonenkov D. V., Lax G., Prokina K. I., Keeling P. J., 2024, Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 190, 107964

2024
[12]

J., Escande M.-L., Intertaglia L., Lebaron P., Suzuki M

Crou \'e J., West N. J., Escande M.-L., Intertaglia L., Lebaron P., Suzuki M. T., 2013, Scientific Reports, 3, 2583

2013
[13]

Dalmaso G. Z. L., Ferreira D., Vermelho A. B., 2015, Marine drugs, 13, 1925

2015
[14]

A., et al., 2023, bioRxiv, pp 2023--08

Davin A. A., et al., 2023, bioRxiv, pp 2023--08

2023
[15]

A., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature22055 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017Natur.544..333D 544, 333

Dittmann J. A., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature22055 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017Natur.544..333D 544, 333

2017 doi
[16]

S., Papineau D., Grenne T., Slack J

Dodd M. S., Papineau D., Grenne T., Slack J. F., Rittner M., Pirajno F., O’Neil J., Little C. T., 2017, Nature, 543, 60

2017
[17]

D., Canchon G., Haworth T

Duffy C. D., Canchon G., Haworth T. J., Gillen E., Chitnavis S., Mullineaux C. W., 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 526, 2265

2023
[18]

B., Behrenfeld M

Field C. B., Behrenfeld M. J., Randerson J. T., Falkowski P., 1998, science, 281, 237

1998
[19]

Gillon M., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature21360 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017Natur.542..456G 542, 456

2017 doi
[20]

F., Brown J

Gillooly J. F., Brown J. H., West G. B., Savage V. M., Charnov E. L., 2001, science, 293, 2248

2001
[21]

F., Gomez J

Gillooly J. F., Gomez J. P., Mavrodiev E. V., 2017, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 284, 20162328

2017
[22]

R., 2024, @doi [Astrophysical Journal Letters] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad3079 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...964L..19G 964, L19

Glein C. R., 2024, @doi [Astrophysical Journal Letters] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad3079 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...964L..19G 964, L19

2024 doi
[23]

M., Enquist B

Grady J. M., Enquist B. J., Dettweiler-Robinson E., Wright N. A., Smith F. A., 2014, Science, 344, 1268

2014
[24]

F., Engle S

Guinan E. F., Engle S. G., 2019, Research Notes of the AAS, 3, 189

2019
[25]

Guiral M., Prunetti L., Aussignargues C., Ciaccafava A., Infossi P., Ilbert M., Lojou E., Giudici-Orticoni M.-T., 2012, Advances in Microbial Physiology, 61, 125

2012
[26]

F., et al., 2017, Science Advances, 3, e1600983

Hoffman P. F., et al., 2017, Science Advances, 3, e1600983

2017
[27]

S., Griesshaber E., Schmahl W

Hoffmann R., Kirchlechner C., Langer G., Wochnik A. S., Griesshaber E., Schmahl W. W., Scheu C., 2015, Biogeosciences, 12, 825

2015
[28]

E., Archer S

Hopkins F. E., Archer S. D., Bell T. G., Suntharalingam P., Todd J. D., 2023, Nature Reviews Earth & Environment, 4, 361

2023
[29]

L., Gabric A

Jackson R. L., Gabric A. J., Cropp R., Woodhouse M. T., 2020, Biogeosciences, 17, 2181

2020
[30]

Jones W., Leigh J., Mayer F., Woese C., Wolfe R., 1983, Archives of Microbiology, 136, 254

1983
[31]

Kimura M., 1989, Genome, 31, 24

1989
[32]

N., Catling D

Krissansen-Totton J., Arney G. N., Catling D. C., 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115, 4105

2018
[33]

M., Kasprowicz A

Kumar S., Suleski M., Craig J. M., Kasprowicz A. E., Sanderford M., Li M., Stecher G., Hedges S. B., 2022, Molecular biology and evolution, 39, msac174

2022
[34]

L., Kramer K

Kwint R. L., Kramer K. J., 1995, Marine Ecology Progress Series, 121, 227

1995
[35]

Lingam M., Loeb A., 2018, @doi [International Journal of Astrobiology] 10.1017/S1473550417000179 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018IJAsB..17..116L 17, 116

2018 doi
[36]

Liu Y., et al., 2024, Geology

2024
[37]

Madhusudhan N., Piette A. A. A., Constantinou S., 2021, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/abfd9c , 918, 1

2021 doi
[38]

I., Rigby F., Barrier E., 2023a, @doi [Faraday Discussions] 10.1039/D3FD00075C , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023FaDi..245...80M 245, 80

Madhusudhan N., Moses J. I., Rigby F., Barrier E., 2023a, @doi [Faraday Discussions] 10.1039/D3FD00075C , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023FaDi..245...80M 245, 80

doi
[39]

Madhusudhan N., Sarkar S., Constantinou S., Holmberg M., Piette A. A. A., Moses J. I., 2023b, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Letters] 10.3847/2041-8213/acf577 , 956, L13

doi
[40]

L., Christensen-Dalsgaard K

Mah J. L., Christensen-Dalsgaard K. K., Leys S. P., 2014, Evolution & development, 16, 25

2014
[41]

L., Kearney M

Maino J. L., Kearney M. R., Nisbet R. M., Kooijman S. A., 2014, Journal of Animal Ecology, 83, 20

2014
[42]

M., Friedman S

Martinez C. M., Friedman S. T., Corn K. A., Larouche O., Price S. A., Wainwright P. C., 2021, Ecology Letters, 24, 1788

2021
[43]

R., Allen A

McClain C. R., Allen A. P., Tittensor D. P., Rex M. A., 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109, 15366

2012
[44]

W., Gillooly J

McCoy M. W., Gillooly J. F., 2008, Ecology letters, 11, 710

2008
[45]

G., et al., 2019, Ecology letters, 22, 2028

Mitchell E. G., et al., 2019, Ecology letters, 22, 2028

2019
[46]

T., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/809/1/25 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...809...25M 809, 25

Montet B. T., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/809/1/25 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...809...25M 809, 25

2015 doi
[47]

R., et al., 2024, Nature Ecology & Evolution, pp 1--13

Moody E. R., et al., 2024, Nature Ecology & Evolution, pp 1--13

2024
[48]

B., Salinas S., 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106, 13860

Munch S. B., Salinas S., 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106, 13860

2009
[49]

G., Kicrboe T., 1994, Limnology and Oceanography, 39, 508

Nielsen T. G., Kicrboe T., 1994, Limnology and Oceanography, 39, 508

1994
[50]

P., Kemp S

O'Connor M. P., Kemp S. J., Agosta S. J., Hansen F., Sieg A. E., Wallace B. P., McNair J. N., Dunham A. E., 2007, Oikos, 116, 1058

2007
[51]

Ohta T., 1992, Annual review of ecology and systematics, pp 263--286

1992
[52]

H., Nowak M

Olejarz J., Iwasa Y., Knoll A. H., Nowak M. A., 2021, Nature communications, 12, 3985

2021
[53]

Dumont, pp 243--257

Padis \'a k J., Sor \'o czki-Pint \'e r \'E ., Rezner Z., 2003, Aquatic Biodiversity: A Celebratory Volume in Honour of Henri J. Dumont, pp 243--257

2003
[54]

R., Vaulot D., 1999, Microbiology and molecular biology reviews, 63, 106

Partensky F., Hess W. R., Vaulot D., 1999, Microbiology and molecular biology reviews, 63, 106

1999
[55]

J., Nygaard K., Steinberg G., Turley C

Patterson D. J., Nygaard K., Steinberg G., Turley C. M., 1993, Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 73, 67

1993
[56]

O., Mikulski L., Brune A., 2012, Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 78, 8245

Paul K., Nonoh J. O., Mikulski L., Brune A., 2012, Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 78, 8245

2012
[57]

J., Bains W., Seager S., 2020, Life, 10, 84

Petkowski J. J., Bains W., Seager S., 2020, Life, 10, 84

2020
[58]

Petraccone L., 2024, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stad3526 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.527.5547P 527, 5547

2024 doi
[59]

A., et al., 2012, Ecology letters, 15, 1465

Price C. A., et al., 2012, Ecology letters, 15, 1465

2012
[60]

A., Geider R

Raven J. A., Geider R. J., 1988, New phytologist, 110, 441

1988
[61]

Rich A., 1962, Horizons in biochemistry, pp 103--126

1962
[62]

E., 2019, Science advances, 5, eaau6253

Righetti D., Vogt M., Gruber N., Psomas A., Zimmermann N. E., 2019, Science advances, 5, eaau6253

2019
[63]

D., Grotzinger J

Sasselov D. D., Grotzinger J. P., Sutherland J. D., 2020, Science Advances, 6, eaax3419

2020
[64]

Slobodkina G., Allioux M., Merkel A., Cambon-Bonavita M.-A., Alain K., Jebbar M., Slobodkin A., 2021, Frontiers in microbiology, 12, 679245

2021
[65]

Smalley I., 1963, Science, 140, 396

1963
[66]

Sogabe S., et al., 2019, Nature, 570, 519

2019
[67]

G., et al., 2024, Nature Geoscience, pp 1--8

Stockey R. G., et al., 2024, Nature Geoscience, pp 1--8

2024
[68]

M., Bates A

Sunday J. M., Bates A. E., Dulvy N. K., 2012, Nature Climate Change, 2, 686

2012
[69]

Teng Z.-J., et al., 2021, Microbiome, 9, 1

2021
[70]

R., 1997, Identifying marine phytoplankton

Tomas C. R., 1997, Identifying marine phytoplankton. Elsevier

1997
[71]

Vetter R., 1995, Journal of Comparative Physiology B, 165, 46

1995
[72]

Volland J.-M., et al., 2022, Science, 376, 1453

2022
[73]

Wang S., Luo H., 2021, Nature Communications, 12, 3324

2021
[74]

B., Brown J

West G. B., Brown J. H., Enquist B. J., 1997, Science, 276, 122

1997
[75]

A., Cox C

Williams T. A., Cox C. J., Foster P. G., Sz \"o ll o si G. J., Embley T. M., 2020, Nature ecology & evolution, 4, 138

2020
[76]

Wunderlich F., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834504 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...624A..49W 624, A49

2019 doi
[77]

Y c as M., 1955, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 41, 714

1955
[78]

C., 2002, Applied and environmental microbiology, 68, 5804

Yoch D. C., 2002, Applied and environmental microbiology, 68, 5804

2002
[79]

Yu G., 2020, Current protocols in bioinformatics, 69, e96

2020
[80]

Zheng Y., et al., 2020, Nature Communications, 11, 4658

2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

P., Gillooly J

Allen A. P., Gillooly J. F., Savage V. M., Brown J. H., 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103, 9130

work page 2006

[2] [2]

O., 1990, Marine chemistry, 30, 1

Andreae M. O., 1990, Marine chemistry, 30, 1

work page 1990

[3] [3]

K., Irwin P

Barstow J. K., Irwin P. G. J., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/slw109 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.461L..92B 461, L92

doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slw109 2016

[4] [4]

H., Gillooly J

Brown J. H., Gillooly J. F., Allen A. P., Savage V. M., West G. B., 2004, Ecology, 85, 1771

work page 2004

[5] [5]

J., de Pedro M

Brown P. J., de Pedro M. A., Kysela D. T., Van der Henst C., Kim J., De Bolle X., Fuqua C., Brun Y. V., 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109, 1697

work page 2012

[6] [6]

E., Mann R

Budd G. E., Mann R. P., 2020, Science Advances, 6, eaaz1626

work page 2020

[7] [7]

M., Glasgow Jr H

Burkholder J. M., Glasgow Jr H. B., 1997, Limnology and Oceanography, 42, 1052

work page 1997

[8] [8]

J., 1997, Paleobiology, 23, 247

Butterfield N. J., 1997, Paleobiology, 23, 247

work page 1997