For me, the most surprising point in the article was this:
> Our analysis reveals that the global marine biomass pyramid contains more consumers than producers, thus an inverse food pyramid.
I didn't understand how such a thing was possible until I read the explanation further down:
> Such inverted biomass distributions can occur when primary producers have a rapid turnover of biomass [on the order of days], while consumer biomass turns over much more slowly [a few years in the case of mesopelagic fish]. Thus, the standing stock of consumers is larger, even though the productivity of producers is necessarily higher.
There's an analogy in the "human world": Farmers were 90% of labor force in the U.S. in 1790, but only 2.6% in 1990.[1] Farming has become so much more efficient that a small group can feed the whole country.
> Our analysis reveals that the global marine biomass pyramid contains more consumers than producers, thus an inverse food pyramid.
I didn't understand how such a thing was possible until I read the explanation further down:
> Such inverted biomass distributions can occur when primary producers have a rapid turnover of biomass [on the order of days], while consumer biomass turns over much more slowly [a few years in the case of mesopelagic fish]. Thus, the standing stock of consumers is larger, even though the productivity of producers is necessarily higher.
There's an analogy in the "human world": Farmers were 90% of labor force in the U.S. in 1790, but only 2.6% in 1990.[1] Farming has become so much more efficient that a small group can feed the whole country.
[1] https://www.agclassroom.org/gan/timeline/farmers_land.htm