in

Asymmetric carbon response to the 2019 extreme positive Indian Ocean Dipole


Abstract

In 2019, one of Indonesia’s most devastating bushfires burned about 3.1 million hectares of forests and peatlands, releasing approximately 708 million tonnes of CO2. The fires were driven by an extreme positive Indian Ocean Dipole (pIOD), which strengthened easterly winds and brought cooler and drier air to the region, creating severe drought conditions. These conditions triggered widespread forest fires across Indonesia. Simultaneously, the same easterly winds displaced warm, nutrient-poor surface waters westward in the eastern equatorial Indian Ocean (EEIO), enhancing upwelling of nutrient-rich deep waters. This process fueled a massive phytoplankton bloom extending over 1000 km. In addition, nutrient deposition from aerosols emitted by the Indonesian fires further enriched the bloom. Together, oceanic upwelling and atmospheric deposition boosted the biomass of large phytoplankton. Satellite estimates suggest that the bloom sequestered approximately 40.19 Tg of carbon, equivalent to 10.1% of the CO2 released by the Indonesian fires, into the deeper ocean. In contrast, air-sea CO2 flux anomalies indicate negligible net atmospheric CO2 uptake, with only 0.05% (0.33 Tg CO2) of the emissions reabsorbed, due to the upwelling-driven dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC)-rich waters. Together, these results highlight a coupled but asymmetric response to climate extremes. The pIOD can simultaneously intensify terrestrial carbon losses through fires, while upwelling enhances the biological pump through blooms. However, the strength of the sequestration was offset by the DIC-rich waters from the upwelling. Understanding this dual impact is crucial for modelling future climate scenarios and assessing the long-term impacts of climate variability on global carbon cycles.

Similar content being viewed by others

Widespread phytoplankton blooms triggered by 2019–2020 Australian wildfires

Gross primary production variations dominate the response of Indian terrestrial carbon fluxes to global climatic phenomena

Critical role of biomass burning aerosols in enhanced historical Indian Ocean warming

Data availability

The datasets analysed during the current study are available at the following repositories. https://data.marine.copernicus.eu/product/OCEANCOLOUR_GLO_BGC_L4_MY_009_104/description, https://stateoftheocean.osmc.noaa.gov/sur/ind/dmi.php, https://sites.science.oregonstate.edu/ocean.productivity/carbon2.model.php. The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available at the time of submission because they are under temporary embargo pending publication of this article. They are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request and will be deposited in a public repository upon publication.

Code availability

All data analyses were conducted using Python, whereas statistically analysis were performed in R version 4.5.152. Any codes used in the manuscript are available upon request from the corresponding author.

References

  1. Saji, N. H., Goswami, B. N., Vinayachandran, P. N. & Yamagata, T. A dipole mode in the tropical Indian Ocean. Nature 401, 360–363 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Nikonovas, T., Spessa, A., Doerr, S. H., Clay, G. D. & Mezbahuddin, S. Near-complete loss of fire-resistant primary tropical forest cover in Sumatra and Kalimantan. Commun. Earth Environ. 1, 65 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Pan, X., Chin, M., Ichoku, C. M. & Field, R. D. Connecting indonesian fires and drought with the type of El Niño and phase of the Indian Ocean Dipole during 1979-2016. J. Geophys. Res.: Atmos. 123, 7974–7988 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Murdiyarso, D. & Adiningsih, E. S. Climate anomalies, Indonesian vegetation fires and terrestrial carbon emissions. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change 12, 101–112 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Page, S. E. et al. The amount of carbon released from peat and forest fires in Indonesia during 1997. Nature 420, 61–65 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Lohberger, S., Stängel, M., Atwood, E. C. & Siegert, F. Spatial evaluation of Indonesia’s 2015 fire-affected area and estimated carbon emissions using Sentinel-1. Glob. Change Biol. 24, 644–654 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Edwards, R. B., Naylor, R. L., Higgins, M. M. & Falcon, W. P. Causes of Indonesia’s forest fires. World Dev. 127, 104717 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Garcia, C. A. et al. Nutrient supply controls particulate elemental concentrations and ratios in the low latitude eastern Indian Ocean. Nat. Commun. 9, 4868 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Twining, B. S. et al. A nutrient limitation mosaic in the eastern tropical Indian Ocean. Deep Sea Res. II: Top. Stud. Oceanogr. 166, 125–140 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Chen, G. et al. The role of equatorial undercurrent in sustaining the eastern Indian Ocean upwelling. Geophys. Res. Lett. 43, 6444–6451 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Chen, G., Han, W., Li, Y. & Wang, D. Interannual variability of equatorial eastern Indian Ocean upwelling: Local versus remote forcing. J. Phys. Oceanogr. 46, 789–807 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Schott, F. A. & McCreary, J. P. The monsoon circulation of the Indian Ocean. Prog. Oceanogr. 51, 1–123 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Paul, M. et al. Distribution and biogeochemical perspectives of nutrients in the eastern equatorial Indian Ocean. Oceanologia 66, 381–393 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Schott, F. A., Xie, S. & McCreary, J. P. Indian Ocean circulation and climate variability. Rev. Geophys. 47 (2009).

  15. Yuan, C. et al. Latitudinal distribution of the picoplankton community in the eastern equatorial Indian Ocean during the boreal fall intermonsoon period. Deep Sea Res. Part I: Oceanogr. Res. Pap. 168, 103451 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Wu, C. et al. Heterotrophic bacteria dominate the diazotrophic community in the eastern Indian Ocean (EIO) during pre-southwest monsoon. Microb. Ecol. 78, 804–819 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Babin, M., Morel, A. & Gentili, B. Remote sensing of sea surface sun-induced chlorophyll fluorescence: Consequences of natural variations in the optical characteristics of phytoplankton and the quantum yield of chlorophyll a fluorescence. Int. J. Remote Sens. 17, 2417–2448 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Dubinsky, Z. & Stambler, N. Photoacclimation processes in phytoplankton: Mechanisms, consequences, and applications. Aquat. Microb. Ecol. 56, 163–176 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Barbieux, M. et al. Assessing the variability in the relationship between the particulate backscattering coefficient and the chlorophyll a concentration from a global Biogeochemical-Argo database. J. Geophys. Res.: Oceans 123, 1229–1250 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Whitmire, A. L., Pegau, W. S., Karp-Boss, L., Boss, E. & Cowles, T. J. Spectral backscattering properties of marine phytoplankton cultures. Opt. Express 18, 15073 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Mignot, A. et al. Understanding the seasonal dynamics of phytoplankton biomass and the deep chlorophyll maximum in oligotrophic environments: a Bio-Argo float investigation. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles. 28, 856–876 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Xing, X., Qiu, G., Boss, E. & Wang, H. Temporal and vertical variations of particulate and dissolved optical properties in the South China Sea. J. Geophys. Res.: Oceans 124, 3779–3795 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Jiang, S. et al. Phytoplankton dynamics as a response to physical events in the oligotrophic eastern Indian Ocean. Prog. Oceanogr. 203, 102784 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Chen, B. & Liu, H. Relationships between phytoplankton growth and cell size in surface oceans: Interactive effects of temperature, nutrients, and grazing. Limnol. Oceanogr. 55, 965–972 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Irwin, A. J., Finkel, Z. V., Schofield, O. M. E. & Falkowski, P. G. Scaling-up from nutrient physiology to the size-structure of phytoplankton communities. J. Plankton Res. 28, 459–471 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Qiu, Y., Cai, W., Li, L. & Guo, X. Argo profiles variability of barrier layer in the tropical Indian Ocean and its relationship with the Indian Ocean Dipole. Geophys. Res. Lett. 39, nil (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Cai, W. et al. Projected response of the indian ocean dipole to greenhouse warming. Nat. Geosci. 6, 999–1007 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Cermeño, P. et al. The role of nutricline depth in regulating the ocean carbon cycle. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 105, 20344–20349 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Baer, S. E. et al. Carbon and nitrogen productivity during spring in the oligotrophic Indian Ocean along the Go-SHIP IO9N transect. Deep Sea Res. II: Top. Stud. Oceanogr. 161, 81–91 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Chavez, F. P., Messié, M. & Pennington, J. T. Marine primary production in relation to climate variability and change. Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 3, 227–260 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Li, H. et al. Robust subsurface biological response during the decaying stage of an extreme Indian Ocean Dipole in 2019. Geophys. Res. Lett. 49 (2022).

  32. Hamilton, D. S. et al. Earth, wind, fire, and pollution: Aerosol nutrient sources and impacts on ocean biogeochemistry. Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 14, 303–330 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Barkley, A. E. et al. African biomass burning is a substantial source of phosphorus deposition to the Amazon, tropical atlantic ocean, and southern ocean. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 116, 16216–16221 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Tang, W. et al. Widespread phytoplankton blooms triggered by 2019-2020 Australian wildfires. Nature. 597, 370–375 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Chau, T.-T. -T., Gehlen, M., Metzl, N. & Chevallier, F. CMEMS-LSCE: a global, 0.25, monthly reconstruction of the surface ocean carbonate system. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 16, 121–160 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Iida, Y., Takatani, Y., Kojima, A. & Ishii, M. Global trends of ocean CO2 sink and ocean acidification: an observation-based reconstruction of surface ocean inorganic carbon variables. J. Oceanogr. 77, 323–358 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Murata, A., Kouketsu, S., Sasaoka, K. & Arulananthan, K. Modulation of surface seawater CO2 system at 80e: Impacts of the positive IOD in 2019. J. Geophys. Res.: Oceans 129, e2024JC021177 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Wong, A. P. S. et al. Argo data 1999-2019: Two million temperature-salinity profiles and subsurface velocity observations from a global array of profiling floats. Front. Mar. Sci. 7, nil (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Bittig, H. C. et al. A BGC-Argo guide: Planning, deployment, data handling and usage. Front. Mar. Sci. 6, 502 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  40. Schmechtig, C. et al. BGC-Argo quality control manual for the chlorophyll-a concentration (Ifremer, France, 2018).

  41. Carval, T. et al. Processing Bio-Argo particle backscattering at the DAC level (Ifremer, France, 2018).

  42. Xing, X. et al. Combined processing and mutual interpretation of radiometry and fluorimetry from autonomous profiling Bio-Argo floats: Chlorophyll a retrieval. J. Geophys. Res. 116, C06020 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Roesler, C. et al. Recommendations for obtaining unbiased chlorophyll estimates from in situ chlorophyll fluorometers: A global analysis of WET Labs ECO sensors. Limnol. Oceanogr.: Methods 15, 572–585 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Hu, C., Lee, Z. & Franz, B. Chlorophyll an algorithms for oligotrophic oceans: A novel approach based on three-band reflectance difference. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 117, C01011 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Saulquin, B., Gohin, F. & d’Andon, O. F. Interpolated fields of satellite-derived multi-algorithm chlorophyll-a estimates at global and European scales in the frame of the European Copernicus-Marine Environment Monitoring Service. J. Oper. Oceanogr. 12, 47–57 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Randles, C. A. et al. The MERRA-2 aerosol reanalysis, 1980 onward. Part I: System description and data assimilation evaluation. J. Clim. 30, 6823–6850 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  47. Yokelson, R. J. et al. Tropical peat fire emissions: 2019 field measurements in Sumatra and Borneo and synthesis with previous studies. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 22, 10173–10194 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Westberry, T., Behrenfeld, M. J., Siegel, D. A. & Boss, E. Carbon-based primary productivity modeling with vertically resolved photoacclimation. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 22, GB2024 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  49. Laws, E. A., D’Sa, E. & Naik, P. Simple equations to estimate ratios of new or export production to total production from satellite-derived estimates of sea surface temperature and primary production. Limnol. Oceanogr.: Methods 9, 593–601 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  50. Wood, S. N. Generalized Additive Models. Annu. Rev. Stat. Appl. 12, 497–526 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  51. Reynolds, R. W., Rayner, N. A., Smith, T. M., Stokes, D. C. & Wang, W. An improved in situ and satellite SST analysis for climate. J. Clim. 15, 1609–1625 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  52. R Core Team. R: A Language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria (2025).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the Higher Institution Centre of Excellence (HICoE) Fund, Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia, Universiti Malaya RU Grant (RU003-2025A), and FIO-UM Joint Center of Marine and Technology Research Fund. Z.Y.K. gratefully acknowledges the HICoE fund for supporting his master’s studies. T.C. would like to acknowledge the support from Southern Marine Science and Engineering Guangdong Laboratory (Zhuhai) (No. SML2024SP020). BGC-Argo data were collected and made freely available by the International Argo Program and the national programs that contribute to it (https://argo.ucsd.edu, https://www.ocean-ops.org). The Argo Program is part of the Global Ocean Observing System. The authors would like to thank the following agencies: Copernicus Marine Service (CMEMS), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA), and Oregon State University (OSU) for making the data freely available.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

W.C. designed research; Z.Y.K. analyzed data; Z.Y.K. and W.C. wrote the paper; J.I., E.S., J. P. K., T.V.S.U.B., Y.F., B. L., T.C., M.F.F.M.N., and A.A.S. contributed data and analysis; all authors reviewed and edited the paper; A.A.S. and W.C. provided primary funding for the research.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to
Wee Cheah.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information (download PDF )

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kang, Z.Y., Cheah, W., Ishizaka, J. et al. Asymmetric carbon response to the 2019 extreme positive Indian Ocean Dipole.
npj Clim Atmos Sci (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-026-01402-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-026-01402-y


Source: Ecology - nature.com

Biodiversity resilience in a tropical rainforest

A drone imagery dataset for semantic segmentation of urban garden ground covers in biodiversity studies

Back to Top