Early Online Release

Oceanography in the Age of Intelligent Robots and a Changing Climate By Chris Scholin

EARLY ONLINE RELEASE

Oceanography | Early Online Release

Oceanography | Vol. 38, No. 3

60

ROGER REVELLE COMMEMORATIVE LECTURE

OCEANOGRAPHY IN

THE AGE OF INTELLIGENT ROBOTS

AND A CHANGING CLIMATE

By Chris Scholin

The Roger Revelle Commemorative Lecture Series was created by the Ocean Studies Board of the

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in honor of Roger Revelle to highlight the

important links between ocean sciences and public policy. Dr. Chris Scholin, the twenty-sixth annual

lecturer, spoke on May 1, 2025, at the National Academy of Sciences.

Credit: MBARI

Oceanography | Early Online Release

Early Online Release | Oceanography

INTRODUCTION

In his opening remarks at the inaugural meeting of The Ocean­

ography Society, David Packard spoke about an opportunity to

accelerate progress in ocean science through technology develop­

ment (Packard, 1989). The ocean, as he saw it, was the last fron­

tier on Earth, and it did not garner the attention it deserved. Yet,

it held untold mysteries and unseen landscapes, and many techni­

cal, scientific, and societally relevant discoveries awaited. Two years

earlier, that insight had led to the founding of the Monterey Bay

Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI; Barber, 1988; Chavez et al.,

2017a). A combination and integration of three foundational tech­

nologies were projected to transform oceanography: remotely oper­

ated vehicles (ROVs), new types of sensors, and advanced comput­

ing and data systems. Starting with those building blocks, Packard’s

charge when founding MBARI was to “go deep and stay long” to

improve our understanding of the ocean (Barber, 1988) and to

“return data, not samples.” This article draws from that legacy.

Packard was right. The advent of robotic and advanced sens­

ing and computing technologies has indeed transformed ocean

exploration. New tools and techniques have allowed us to over­

come many, but by no means all, of the challenges posed by the

sea’s depth, vastness, and inaccessibility. Packard, like many

others, understood that a sustained investment in basic research

and engineering would pay future dividends in ways that could

not be foreseen. Today, nearly 40 years after MBARI’s founding,

hybrid human-machine and fully autonomous systems are reveal­

ing an unprecedented perspective on the interplay between marine

chemistry, physics, biology, and geology. Robots enable coordi­

nated observations of the water column and seafloor in ways that

humans cannot match and allow extended missions in extreme

environments. Collection of long-term monitoring data from far-

flung corners of the globe, automated in situ analyses, real-time

communications and data sharing, and active multimedia public

engagement across continents are now a part of everyday oceanog­

raphy. A new window into our ocean world is opening—one that

was long imagined by visionary scientists, engineers, and science

fiction writers alike.

This paper examines a number of technological innovations that

are revealing surprising insights into the inner workings of our

ocean and its inhabitants against the backdrop of a rapidly chang­

ing climate. The examples given are by no means a comprehensive

review of the role that technology is playing in ocean exploration.

Many individuals from organizations around the world have made

lasting contributions that have brought us to this juncture. Here,

several case studies are chosen to illustrate that ongoing process

and to pay homage to some of the scientists and engineers who

set us on this course. We still have much to learn about the sea, its

inhabitants, and the vital role it plays in sustaining the health of

our planet and the well-being of society. Decades-long interdisci­

plinary science and engineering pursuits have ushered in a new era

of discovery driven by bold ideas, serendipitous discoveries, and

the allure of the largest and least explored habitat on Earth.

TAKING THE PULSE OF THE PLANET

In 1957, Roger Revelle and Hans Suess captured the scientific com­

munity’s imagination with their groundbreaking paper on CO2

exchange between the atmosphere and the ocean (Revelle and

Suess, 1957). They argued that CO2 released from the burning of

fossil fuels was accumulating in the atmosphere and that a signif­

icant fraction of the emissions had dissolved into the sea. Perhaps

most importantly, they went on to say,

…human beings are now carrying out a large scale geophysical

experiment of a kind that could not have happened in the past or

be reproduced in the future… This experiment, if adequately doc­

umented, may yield a far-reaching insight into the processes deter­

mining weather and climate.

Their findings were provocative, scientifically tantalizing, and

urgently driven by increasing global industrialization, and sug­

gested that increased atmospheric CO2 could lead to changes in

ocean chemistry and a warmer climate with potentially compound­

ing amplifications due to a number of processes that were known

but not well characterized at the time. The insight was brilliant, but

ABSTRACT. The advent of robotic and artificial intelligence technologies has transformed ocean exploration, overcoming many, but

not all, of the challenges posed by the sea’s depth, vastness, and inaccessibility. From data collection and long-term monitoring to real-

time communications, data sharing, and public engagement, hybrid human-machine and fully autonomous systems are revealing an

unprecedented perspective on the interplay between marine chemistry, physics, geology, and biology in ways that humans cannot match.

This paper examines a number of exemplary decades-long interdisciplinary science and engineering pursuits that have fueled that prog­

ress. More recent advancements in microelectronics, biopharma, aerospace, manufacturing, materials and computer sciences, and social

media—foundations of multibillion dollar industries that generally have nothing to do with marine science—are accelerating our abil­

ity to explore the ocean and share our findings with a global audience. Every time we return to the sea with open minds, a willingness to

attempt something that has never been done before, and new technologies in hand, we learn something new, more often than not seren­

dipitously. The ocean is undergoing increasingly rapid change due to human activities, and we are in a race to learn more about its inner

workings, reveal its incredible diversity of life, and visualize its submerged landscapes. A sustained commitment to technology develop­

ment is integral to competing in that race. No doubt, there is still much to learn about the largest and least explored habitat on Earth and

the vital role it plays in sustaining the health of our planet and the well-being of society.

Oceanography | Early Online Release

the capabilities for testing this theory globally were in their infancy.

The consequences of fossil fuel consumption were of tremendous

importance societally, but at the time of Revelle and Suess’s procla­

mation, that was not a part of public discussion and politics as it

is today. Decades of research followed as investigators sought the

means to conduct ocean-basin-scale measurements needed to

assess predicted trends. In 1999, Peter Brewer elegantly recounted

that history during the first annual Revelle Lecture (Brewer, 2000).

Capturing time-space variations in the ocean’s interior, at basin

scales, accurately, is no small challenge. For many years, the only

practical way to tackle this problem was by using crewed ships to

conduct hydrographic surveys. Despite the analytical and logisti­

cal challenges, a picture of the exchange of CO2 between the atmo­

sphere and ocean slowly emerged (Brewer, 2013). Decades of

work were required to establish the connection between the burn­

ing of fossil fuels and the reality of human-driven climate change

and ocean acidification. Ironically, nearly 70 years after Revelle

and Suess issued their “geophysical experiment” proposition, we

now find ourselves scrambling to assess the promise and pitfalls

of artificially stimulating the ocean to absorb more CO2 to mit­

igate a climate crisis of our own making (e.g., Coale et al., 1996;

Brewer, 2013; Bach and Boyd, 2021; NASEM, 2022; Levin et al.,

2023; S.M. Smith et al., 2024; Findlay et al., 2025, in this issue).

ENTER THE ROBOTS

As ocean sensor systems matured, so too did the platforms on

which they could be deployed. In addition to measurements

acquired manually, scientists and engineers developed the means to

automate air-sea CO2 flux measurements aboard ships, moorings,

and autonomous surface vehicles (ASVs; Friederich et al., 1995;

Chavez et al., 2017b, 2018). It was apparent that seasonality and

geographical location played an important role in when and where

there was a net flux of CO2 into or out of the sea (e.g., Takahashi

et al., 2009). Other sensor systems for autonomously acquiring bio­

geochemical measurements, such as pH (Johnson et al., 2016) and

nitrate (Sakamoto et al., 2017), also evolved along with improve­

ments for in situ quantification of oxygen and optical parameters,

all of which were deployable on autonomous underwater vehicles

(AUVs) and ROVs. Development and use of these biogeochemi­

cal sensor suites were greatly aided by the availability of mooring

technology and well-established time-series studies that included

routine ship-based hydrographic surveys (e.g., Karl, 2010, 2014;

Chavez et al., 2017b). Now, after years of observations, the unmis­

takable trend of rising CO2 in the atmosphere with concurrent

changes in ocean pH and temperature has emerged (Figure 1;

e.g., Thorne et al., 2024) along with complex biological and eco­

system manifestations (e.g., Doney et al., 2020; Alter et al., 2024).

Thanks to a remarkable confluence of technologies and dogged

determination on the part of scores of visionary scientists and

engineers, it is now possible to observe ocean basin-scale car­

bon cycling using a distributed fleet of profiling floats—robots—

that offer much more information at a far lower cost compared

to ship-based surveys (Figure 2a,b; e.g.,  Johnson and Claustre,

2016; Claustre et al., 2020; Schofield et al., 2022; Sarmiento et al.,

2023). A global fleet of floats now returns sensor measurement

data from remote regions of the globe in real time, and the infor­

mation acquired is freely accessible to anyone nearly instantly via

the Internet (GO-BGC). This remarkable achievement has given

ocean scientists the equivalent of a medical doctor’s tool kit for

rapidly assessing a patient’s vital signs. As a result, we now know

that the Southern Ocean—one of the most inaccessible and diffi­

cult places to work—plays a major role in ocean-atmosphere car­

bon cycling and global climate modulation (Liniger et al., 2025).

FIGURE 1. Plots show time series from 1900 to the present of (a) atmospheric

carbon dioxide (CO2) measured from ice cores (black) and the Mauna Loa

Observatory (red) on the Big Island of Hawai‘i (Keeling et al., 2001; MacFarling

Meure et al., 2006). The trend in the partial pressure of surface ocean pCO2

(a measure of CO2 entering or exiting the sea) in Monterey Bay, California,

from the early 1990s is also shown (blue; updated from Chavez et al., 2017b).

(b) Surface ocean pH data from the early 1990s to the present are shown

here from the Hawai‘i Ocean Time-series (HOT) program (red; Karl and

Lukas, 1996) and Monterey Bay California (blue; updated from Chavez et al.,

2017b). Note that the pH scale is logarithmic. (c) The figure shows sea sur­

face temperature anomalies (seasonal cycle removed) from the California

Current along the US West Coast (Huang et al., 2017). Clear trends are evi­

dent for all of the measurements.

Early Online Release | Oceanography

As the profiling float network grows and is sustained, we increas­

ingly gain a perspective on how other oceanic regions are respond­

ing. These programs have also proven to have phenomenal educa­

tion and outreach appeal (Figure 2c,d). Groups can adopt floats,

name them (even personalize their housings), and follow them

over time in conjunction with classroom lesson plans (Adopt-A-

Float program; EARTH Lesson Plans; Matsumoto et al., in press).

To date, people from all 50 US states, Puerto Rico, Samoa, and over

15 countries have adopted floats.

SEEING IS BELIEVING

Advances in biogeochemical measurements have only recently

given us the means to observe the basic vital signs of the global

ocean. Understanding pelagic ecosystem dynamics and the role

that animals play in the marine carbon cycle poses an entirely dif­

ferent and arguably far greater challenge. Since the time of the

Challenger Expedition (Thomson, 1887), trawl nets have been

used to search for life in the deep sea with success, but that method

returns no context about the three-dimensional environment in

which animals live, and it destroys fragile animals, thus obscuring

their presence. Diving into the depths to observe life in its natu­

ral habitat, up close and in-person, offered an entirely new under­

standing compared to what nets yielded.

William Beebe (1934), in his book Half Mile Down, recounted

his personal experiences of being lowered into the sea in a bathy­

sphere. He described an abundance of strange deep-sea animals

that frequently glowed in bedazzling ways that defied his expla­

nation. One of his team members, Else Bostelmann, a talented

artist, created original works for National Geographic magazine

that reflected Bebee’s accounts and brought deep-sea biology to

the public’s attention (Widder, 2016). Decades later, more sophis­

ticated expeditions using self-propelled crewed submersibles,

including single-person vehicles (e.g.,  Robison 1983; Alldredge

et al., 1984; Widder et al., 1989), opened a new chapter of deep-​

water research and exploration.

With MBARI’s founding in the late 1980s, David Packard gave

scientists and engineers a new platform for accessing the deep

sea. His charge was to adapt an ROV dubbed Ventana, originally

designed for use in the offshore oil and gas industry, for use as a

multi-purpose research platform (Figure 3a,b). Prior to that time,

no one had attempted to use an ROV for such purposes. Robison

et al. (2017) offered a unique perspective on the history of initiat­

ing and developing a midwater research program using ROVs as

did Haddock et al. (2017). At the time of its introduction to the

ocean science community, Ventana, and its support vessel Point

Lobos, seemed unremarkable compared to storied crewed sub­

mersibles such as Alvin and Johnson Sea Link and their much larger

mother ships. But it was soon apparent that ROVs offered tremen­

dous capabilities and were highly adaptable. They quickly became

integral to the discovery of new species and revelations of pelagic

ecosystem structure and function, in particular, the prevalence

and importance of gelatinous animals (Haddock, 2004; Robison,

2004). ROV time-series studies also made possible the first-ever

comprehensive description of a deep pelagic food web (Choy et al.,

2017). All of these advancements were fundamentally enabled

by telepresence—underwater video recordings—combined with

FIGURE 2. Biogeochemical sensing data and equipment. (a) Comparison

of ship-based profiles for oxygen, chlorophyll, nitrate, and pH. (b) A global

map shows the distribution of profiling floats provided by the Global Ocean

Biogeochemistry Array (GO-BGC), the Southern Ocean Carbon and Climate

Observations and Modeling (SOCCOM) project, and US partners. (c) School

children learn about profiling float technology by examining a mockup with

transparent housing. (d) MBARI marine educator Jennifer Magnusson is

shown ready to launch a float named Trieste from R/V Thomas G. Thompson

in 2024. The National Academies’ Ocean Studies Board (OSB), overseer for

the annual Revelle Lecture, named and adopted the Trieste float in mem­

ory of former OSB member Don Walsh who, with Jacques Piccard, made

the first historic dive to the depths of Challenger Deep in the bathyscaphe

Trieste. Images for (c) and (d) provided by G. Matsumoto and J. Magnusson,

respectively, 2025

Oceanography | Early Online Release

to reproduce midwater transect capabilities that had long been

refined using ROVs. The platform is able to travel faster than an

ROV and is quieter (Reisenbichler et  al., 2016; Robison et  al.,

2017). Other AUVs along these lines are rapidly becoming more

common and trending smaller in size for both water column and

seafloor observations. Just as robots have improved our capacity

for biogeochemical sensing, ROVs and AUVs now offer another

suite of platforms and tools for probing the “large scale geophysi­

cal experiment” that Revelle and Suess foretold.

THE DATA DELUGE

Obtaining high-resolution underwater video observations and

conducting in situ experiments have proven to be effective means

for documenting ecosystem changes that are occurring over

time. For example, in Monterey Bay, changes in oxygen in the

water column are linked to observed changes in animal behavior,

which in turn has significant implications for food web dynamics

(e.g., Figure 5; Robison et al., 2017). A key enabling technology

that has made this observation possible is the Video Annotation

and Reference System (VARS; Schlining and Stout, 2006; VARS

Overview). VARS provides the means to expertly identify what is

seen in underwater imagery—a process known as annotation—

and merge it with concurrent measurements of relevant physi­

cal and chemical parameters. The result is a searchable database

that contains geolocated quantitative sightings of particular ani­

mals cross referenced with the environmental conditions under

which they were observed. VARS is an open-source application

that has been adopted by a number groups, including Australia’s

Commonwealth Science and Industrial Research Organization

(CSIRO), Oregon State University, the University of Hawai‘i School

of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology (SOEST), and the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). At

MBARI, to date, VARS has grown to include nearly 29,000 hours

of underwater imagery from which almost 11 million observations

of over 4,400 unique “concepts” (e.g., animals, debris, geologic for­

mations) have been cataloged. Nearly 600 peer-reviewed publica­

tions and over 300 new species have been described drawing from

that archive. The Deep-Sea Guide offers a publicly accessible por­

tal for accessing a portion of VARS content.

With the ever-growing collection of imagery from a multitude

FIGURE 3. Evolution of platforms used for midwater research and time series studies at MBARI. (a) ROV Ventana’s first launch in 1988 from R/V Point Lobos

© 1988 MBARI (b) Modern-day incarnation of Ventana being deployed from R/V Rachel Carson. Kim Fulton-Bennet © 2014 MBARI (c) The i2MAP AUV is

designed for conducting midwater surveys. Kim Reisenbichler © 2022 MBARI

concurrent measurements of temperature, oxygen, salinity, and

other ocean variables. The addition of robotic sensors and sam­

plers to ROVs also made it possible to collect specimens and con­

duct unique in situ experiments. A recent example of the utility of

what ROVs can enable scientifically is particularly well illustrated

in the detailed description of a deep-sea animal new to science that

for years was known only as the “mystery mollusc” (Robison and

Haddock, 2024; Figure 4). Similarly, ROVs have also proven to be

valuable tools for evaluating the impacts of rising levels of CO2 on

ocean biology and chemistry both in the water column and on the

seafloor (e.g., Barry et al., 2017; Brewer et al., 2017; Robison et al.,

2017). In today’s world, ROVs are integral to ocean exploration

and are proliferating. The technology continues to evolve rapidly,

making the platforms more capable, accessible, and affordable.

Operating ROVs is less costly and logistically less complex than

crewed submersibles, but it still requires a surface support ship

and skilled crew. In a step toward reducing the dependency on

crewed ships, AUVs are being modified to conduct similar sur­

veys. For example, the i2MAP vehicle built at MBARI (Figure 3c)

carries imaging and acoustic systems along with other sensors

FIGURE 4. This animal was long known as “the mystery mollusc.” Years of

observations, experimentation, and specimen collections using remotely

operated vehicles (ROVs) ultimately led to its formal description as

Bathydevius caudactylus, an entirely new bathypelagic nudibranch genus

and species (Robison and Haddock, 2024). © 2002 MBARI

Early Online Release | Oceanography

of platforms, humans can no longer keep pace with the demand

for video annotation and the ancillary data that come with it.

Machine learning is now playing a central role in processing that

information. At the time of this writing, the VARS annotation

pipeline has been improved by using computer models trained

on approximately 900,000 localizations of over 1,600 expertly

curated concepts to assist with image annotation and identifica­

tion (Figure 6; VARS-ML). In an effort to federate and coordi­

nate this line of research, FathomNet offers a publicly accessible

platform for sharing images and accessing artificial intelligence

and machine learning tools to accelerate the analysis of ocean

visual data (Katija et al., 2022; Crosby et al., 2023). A compan­

ion program, FathomVerse, a free mobile game, offers an inter­

active science community experience where players engage

with real ocean images collected by researchers and robots from

around the world. Participants who play the game contribute

to improving computer algorithms used to chronicle ocean life

while learning about the animals they see, which is proving to be a

technologically novel way to expand participation in ocean explo­

ration and discovery.

Machine learning and artificial intelligence can also be used

aboard remotely operated and autonomous platforms to process

visual and other sensory data in real time. Without any human

intervention, vehicles can adapt to dynamic environmental con­

ditions by leveraging physical, chemical, and biological cues that

enable them to track marine life over extended periods (e.g., Zhang

et al., 2021a, 2021b) and navigate complex terrain in the absence of

detailed maps (e.g., Troni et al., in press a, in press b). The power

and potential of machine learning and artificial intelligence is only

beginning to alter our ability to observe the ocean holistically.

In the years ahead, this area of rapid innovation will undoubt­

edly transform data acquisition, analysis, and dissemination both

ashore and at sea. This technology is also an effective means for

engaging the next generation of ocean enthusiasts. Robots super­

charged with artificial intelligence offer something for everyone.

Whether it is the science they enable, the imagery they produce,

the computational capability that makes them “smart,” the mis­

sions they undertake, or just the impressiveness of the machines

themselves, people are simply fascinated by robots.

THE BIOLOGICAL CARBON PUMP

AND VERTICAL MIGRATION

World Wars I and II sparked a revolution in ocean engineering.

Submarines were proving to be very effective at sinking combatants

and ships carrying supplies to aid the war effort, and a technological

advance was needed to detect and intercept them. Sonar (SOund

Navigation And Ranging) offered an answer while also providing

a way to gauge the depth of the seafloor. As the technology was

refined, a reflective layer was sometimes detected in the water col­

umn that could be so dense it gave a false sense of the actual depth

of the seafloor, even to the extent that ships traveling in uncharted

waters reported the presence of phantom shoals. Stranger still, that

feature was usually observed to move in rhythm with the time of

day, rising at night and descending during the day. The deep scat­

tering layer (DSL), as it came be known, was later associated with

dense aggregates of animals (e.g., Ritche, 1953; Dietz, 1962).

The advent of sonar had revealed something amazing: diel verti­

cal migration. Animals who spent daylight hours in the twilight of

the deep rose at night to feed, and drew organic carbon with them

when descending back to the depths during the day. This behavior

accelerates the transport of carbon from surface to deep waters—a

phenomenon known as the biological pump—contributing to the

ocean’s role in modulating climate while also providing food for

animals and microbes throughout the water column and on the

FIGURE 5. Time-series obser­

vations document the displace­

ment of several midwater animals

toward the surface in response

to a shoaling oxygen minimum

zone (after Robison et al., 2017).

Hake and Chiroteuthis images ©

2025 MBARI; Tomopterid image

Rob Sherlock © 2007 MBARI

Oceanography | Early Online Release

seafloor (e.g.,  Robison et  al., 2005; Brierley, 2014; Honjo et  al.,

2014; K.L. Smith et  al., 2017; Archibald et  al., 2019). The same

processes can also transport microplastics, which has led to the

suggestion that a large, previously unknown reservoir of marine

microplastics may be contained within animal communities living

in the deep sea. (Choy et al., 2019).

Comprehensively investigating the players and processes that

transform and transport organic matter from the sea surface to

the seafloor over decades is not easy (e.g.,  Messié et  al., 2023).

The distribution and behavior of the participants and the mate­

rial they transform and produce varies tremendously in time and

space, challenging our ability to model biologically driven carbon

flux and resultant climate influence. Persistent observations of the

ocean using a variety of tools is a necessary step toward meeting

that grand challenge (e.g., Karl, 2014; Chavez et al., 2021a).

LISTENING AND DECODING WHAT ANIMALS

LEAVE IN THEIR WAKE

It is truly amazing what you can learn by listening. The history

of ocean soundscape analysis is a great example. In the mid-

4th century BCE, the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle in his

landmark work History of Animals noted that sea creatures pro­

duced sounds (see Thompson, 1910). Ancient mariners also mar­

veled at the mysterious noises that occasionally resonated through

the hulls of their ships. Over millennia, these astute observations

gave way to curiosity-driven research and wartime pursuits that

exploited ocean sound. Following World War II, revelations about

the lives and vocalizations of charismatic megafauna piqued the

public’s interest, popularizing the idea of an ocean soundscape and

highlighting the mysteries of marine mammal communication

(e.g., Schevill and Lawrence, 1949; Payne and McVay, 1971). In an

FIGURE 6. Videos are processed

using an integration of MBARI’s

Video Annotation and Reference

System (VARS) with advanced

machine learning tools (VARS-ML)

to identify and track animals

(a) on the seafloor and (b) in the

water column. The VARS-ML ini­

tiative combines the expertise of

marine scientists, engineers, and

data scientists. Source: Lonny

Lundsten and Nancy Jacobsen

Stout. Images © 2025 MBARI

Early Online Release | Oceanography

all too familiar fashion, it did not take long to learn that human

activities are a source of ocean soundscape pollution that can be

injurious to marine wildlife (e.g.,  Hildebrand, 2009). Although

the notion of an ocean soundscape is ancient, and its use in ocean

studies has long been the subject of intensive research and devel­

opment, we continue to make remarkable discoveries by simply

listening with increasingly sophisticated means for doing so.

Today, detailed observations of the comings and goings of

marine animals is greatly enhanced by soundscape analysis

(e.g., Oestreich et al., 2022, 2024; Ryan et al., 2022, 2025). The com­

bination of passive and active acoustic observations has proven

useful in investigating predator foraging behaviors and the ecology

of fear (e.g., Benoit-Bird et al., 2019; Urmy and Benoit-Bird, 2021).

“Listening with light” by way of using fiber-optic cables as vibra­

tion sensors—a technique known as distributed acoustic sens­

ing (DAS)—is the latest evolution in the ongoing push to broaden

access to and analysis of the ocean soundscape (Saw et al., 2025).

By combining fleets of ASVs and AUVs equipped with acoustic,

imaging, and water sampling payloads, a new perspective on the

movements of animals traversing the environment in response to

ever changing ocean conditions is emerging, including by tracking

the traces of “genetic soup” shed in their wakes (e.g., Zhang et al.,

2021b; Figure 7).

The use of organisms’ DNA and RNA (and other methods) to

reveal what species are present and how they are responding to

their environments has advanced in concert with the develop­

ment and application of ocean imaging and acoustics. The tools

and techniques employed have storied pasts and spring from the

creativity and insights of many investigators over decades. What

has come to be known as “ecogenomics” is deeply rooted in sub­

cellular biological studies and molecular analytical methods for

detecting and decoding the very essence of life itself. Just as under­

water imaging and soundscape analysis grew from industrial uses

and for purposes unrelated to ocean ecology, molecular biology,

nucleic acid sequencing, bioinformatics, and other methods unre­

lated to marine science were adopted for ocean applications, for­

ever altering the course of modern marine biology. Microbial ecol­

ogists arguably led the way (e.g., Pace, 1985; Karl, 2014).

In a surprising twist, Ficetola et al. (2008) discovered that DNA

shed by frogs could be detected in the environment in which

they lived even when you could not see the animals themselves,

sparking an environmental DNA (eDNA) forensics revolution

(e.g., Kelly et al., 2014; Stoeckle et al., 2024). The analysis of eDNA

offers a noninvasive method for assessing biodiversity and track­

ing animal movements by collecting samples of water and sequenc­

ing the recovered material, enabling simultaneous detection of

marine organisms across multiple trophic levels (e.g., Chavez et al.,

2021b). As eDNA analysis has evolved, our eyes have been opened

to the notion of “genetic dark matter” that is recoverable from the

environment but has no described source or, in some cases, no

well-characterized function (e.g., Venter et al., 2004; Roux et al.,

2015; Delmont et al., 2022). Analysis of the sea’s genetic soup tells

us that there is a great deal of marine life and genetic capacity that

has not yet been characterized.

Just as machine learning and artificial intelligence have played

a huge role in analyzing and reacting to ocean imagery and sound,

they are likewise fueling the analysis of eDNA to synthesize an

integrated picture of a complex web of life. Although the detec­

tion and real-time analysis of imagery, sound, and other bulk water

properties are now commonly employed to guide autonomous

platforms during targeted field observations, devices that enable

in situ, “hands off,” real-time analysis of eDNA and other cellu­

lar metabolites are still very much in their infancy (e.g., Scholin

et al., 2017). With a few notable examples (e.g., Truelove et al.,

2019; Peter Thielen et al., Johns Hopkins University, pers. comm.,

2025), marine eDNA surveys rest largely on the acquisition, pres­

ervation, and return of samples for shoreside analysis (Yamahara

et  al., 2019; Zhang et  al., 2021a; Truelove et  al., 2022; Preston

et  al., 2023). Despite the progress, scaling up the use of robots

that enable integrated optical, acoustic, and “omic” characteriza­

tion of the sea presents a very significant technological challenge

when compared to using profiling floats to conduct global scale

biogeochemical observations.

TO THE SEAFLOOR

Descending to the seafloor, whether using a crewed submers­

ible or an ROV, has been likened to being dropped into a pitch-

black room and using only a flashlight to see what lies ahead.

Remarkable discoveries have been made by picking dive sites that

are known to offer different types of terrain that might lead to find­

ing something novel. The discovery of the “octopus garden” near

the base of Davidson Seamount offers an excellent, recent exam­

ple of using ship-acquired bathymetry to guide an exploratory

ROV dive that serendipitously uncovered something remark­

able (King and Brown, 2019). No doubt that method works, but

the area that can be covered is limited, and for the most part, you

have no detailed map to lead the way. AUVs are changing that

FIGURE 7. A fleet of long-range autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs;

Hobson et al., 2012) fitted with different imaging, water sampling, and eDNA

collection payloads are lined up alongside a Liquid Robotics Wave Glider, all

readied for deployment in Monterey Bay. The fleet of vehicles allows coor­

dinated observations for extended periods to provide a multifaceted view of

dynamic ecosystem processes. After Zhang et al. (2021a,b). Susan von Thun

© 2017 MBARI

Oceanography | Early Online Release

calculus. Low-resolution, surface-vessel-based maps can now be

used to guide higher-resolution AUV-based surveys. AUVs can

run in close proximity to the ground compared to a vessel at the

sea surface, thus providing much more detail on what lies below.

The combination of nested surface vessel-AUV-ROV surveys has

greatly aided our understanding of underwater landscapes and

how they evolve, and this approach now informs choices on what

locations to observe more closely and repeatedly to improve the

odds of making new discoveries (e.g., Caress et al., 2008, 2012;

Paull et al., 2010; Paduan et al., 2018, Figure 8).

Even highly detailed bathymetric surveys fail to reveal much

about the animals that inhabit the seafloor. With relatively few

exceptions, most life on the seabed is sub-meter scaled and often

transparent to acoustic energy. By combining high-resolution laser

and optical imagery with acoustic mapping, a truly astounding

view of the seafloor emerges (Figure 9). The systems for acquir­

ing that information can be deployed on ROVs (e.g., Caress et al.,

2025) and are extendable to AUVs, greatly expanding the area that

can be surveyed in detail. Processing the imagery collected using

machine learning techniques also holds promise for significantly

speeding up quantitative assessments of specific animals or other

features of interest even while the vehicle is underway. Further

study of the famed octopus garden provides a stunning example of

what is possible when combining different modes of seafloor visu­

alizations to inform targeted studies that not long ago would have

seemed a pipe dream (Barry et al., 2023; Figure 9). Similar studies

of deep-sea coral and sponge communities found serendipitously

at Sur Ridge and elsewhere paint a similar picture (Girard et al.,

2024; Figure 10). These discoveries highlight what is made pos­

sible by using a combination of hybrid human-machine and fully

autonomous systems for visualizing the seafloor.

Despite that progress, the vast majority of the seabed has never

been mapped at scales needed to reveal underwater landscapes

in detail. Satellite altimetry-derived maps provide ~5 km grid

resolution estimates of seafloor depth for the entire ocean bottom

using gravity anomalies (W.H.F. Smith and Sandwell, 1997), but

those maps provide only a coarse perspective on what lies below,

much like a person viewing a large terrestrial mountain range, deep

valley, or vast plain from a great distance. High-resolution maps

of the seafloor acquired using surface vessel-mounted multibeam

sonar varies linearly with water column depth, typically on the order

of 2 m at 100 m depth to 100 m at 5,000 m depth (Mayer, 2006), but

even those maps currently cover only ~26% of the ocean bottom.

Visualizing deep-sea biological communities requires much higher

resolution, ideally centimeter or even millimeter scale, as shown in

Figure 9. In other words, much of what lies below has never been

seen by human eyes. Although the technology for doing so is avail­

able, actually accomplishing that goal globally is an enormous task

and not likely to come to fruition anytime soon. Once again, robots

offer a path forward for tackling that challenge because they can

work when and where people cannot, dare not, or just prefer to

avoid for many practical and logistical reasons.

A combination of crewed and uncrewed surface and subsurface

vessels are now actively engaged in mapping the entirety of the sea­

floor as a contribution to the Seabed 2030 initiative. Seabed 2030 is

a collaborative project sponsored by the Nippon Foundation and

the General Bathymetric Chart of the Ocean (GEBCO) that aims to

assemble all available bathymetric data into a single, freely accessi­

ble map for the benefit of all. Like the global fleet of profiling floats

returning data on the vital signs of the world’s ocean, Seabed 2030

is a great example of what can be accomplished through public-​

private partnerships, international cooperation, and data sharing to

grow our understanding of seafloor bathymetry. Given the task at

hand and its relevance to society, it speaks to the age-old adage that

“necessity is the mother of invention.” Developing new means for

comprehensively mapping the seafloor is ripe for innovation, fol­

lowing in the footsteps of developing and deploying platforms and

sensors for assessing ocean biogeochemistry on a global scale.

FIGURE 8. Animation demon­

strates the combined use of ship,

AUV, and ROV-based surveys to

obtain

high-resolution

seafloor

bathymetry and imagery at Sur

Ridge within the Monterey Bay

National Marine Sanctuary (Seeing

Sur Ridge). © 2023 MBARI

Early Online Release | Oceanography

FIGURE 9. The use of nested resolution seafloor mapping to reveal the Octopus Garden. (a) Seafloor bathymetry collected using ship-based multibeam

sonar yielded 5–50 m resolution, depending on water depth. The red box indicates the location of the Octopus Garden pearl octopus (Muusoctopus

robustus) brooding site, southeast of Davidson Seamount. (b) MBARI’s seafloor mapping AUV (inset) provides 1 m resolution bathymetry that is shown here

overlain on the base map acquired from ships. The red box indicates the location of Octopus Garden Ridge. (c) Octopus Garden Ridge at 1 m-scale is overlain

here with ROV survey track lines. (d) The ROV-mounted Low Altitude Survey System (LASS; inset) is used to provide 1 cm resolution bathymetry and 2 mm

resolution seafloor photography using a combination of multibeam sonar, lidar, and color still cameras. (d) and (e) The 1 cm LASS lidar bathymetry is shown

at two map scales. (f), (g), (h), and (i) These panels show the 2 mm-scale color photomosaics at four map scales, zooming in to individual animals. Source:

David Caress and James Barry. Images © 2025 MBARI

CONCLUSIONS

The history of technology development in the quest to explore and

observe the ocean offers many enduring lessons. At least five take­

aways are apparent:

• There is much to gain by working as an interdisciplinary team

to tackle daunting challenges, even when those problems may

require years or decades to overcome.

• Fostering an enduring peer relationship among scientists, engi­

neers, and marine operations specialists in concert with the

public fuels discovery.

• Being open-minded to what is possible even though it may seem

improbable or counter to current thought begets innovation.

Oceanography | Early Online Release

FIGURE 10. High-resolution mapping and imaging of the

Octopus Garden (Figure 9) provided the basis for conduct­

ing targeted studies of the animals utilizing that habitat

(Barry et al., 2023). In one instance, a time lapse camera was

deployed from a ship on an ROV and then deposited precisely

among benthic fauna where it operated autonomously (a).

Still images from that vantage point were taken every 20 min­

utes from March 3, 2022, to August 29, 2022, revealing ani­

mals arriving, nesting, or dying post-breeding (b). The time

lapse imagery provided a unique perspective on the dynam­

ics of the community from scientific as well as educational

and outreach purposes (Secrets of the Octopus Garden).

Images © 2022 MBARI

• “Failures” are inevitable if one attempts to do something that

has not been done before; failures are stepping stones toward

transformative engineering development and scientific advance­

ments.

• Never underestimate the potential of serendipity, and be open-

minded to changing course when an opportunity or new tech­

nology presents itself.

The foregoing consideration of how ocean technology has

evolved in recent years and how it has impacted ocean science is

a powerful endorsement of those lessons and a tribute to all who

have walked that path.

Much of the technological revolution that has been brought to

bear on ocean exploration and observation was primarily driven

by a variety of achievements in industrial settings that often had

nothing to do with marine science. Advancements in micro­

electronics, biopharma, aerospace, manufacturing, material and

computer science, and other disciplines, as well as social media,

have dramatically transformed our ability to access the sea, reveal

its mysteries, and share the findings with a global audience. This

cycle is accelerating. Every time we return to the ocean with new

technologies in hand, we learn something new (e.g.,  Chisholm

et  al., 1988) and grow to appreciate the connection between

societal well-being and the health of the sea.

Throughout history, we have approached ocean exploration

and observation through a decidedly human sensory perspective.

There is still much to learn. Ocean-dwelling animals perceive their

environments in many ways we humans have not yet learned to

interpret or fully comprehend; examples include their responses to

electromagnetic fields and their use of chemosensory capabilities.

Looking forward, it is likely that just as the use of biogeochemical,

optical, acoustic, and omic sensing has revealed surprising insights

about the interplay between marine chemistry, physics, biology,

and geology, so too will new sensor systems give us a better appre­

ciation of the lives of ocean animals. As Bruce Robison (MBARI,

pers. comm., 2025) aptly put it:

Early Online Release | Oceanography

To the inhabitants of the deep sea, their world must seem very

different than it seems to us, because they are comprehending it

with vastly different sensors than we have. The more we can per­

ceive their world the way they do, the better we’ll understand it.

Our inherent biases limit us.

Revelle and Suess’s “large scale geophysical experiment” is

ongoing. We are in a race to learn more about the ocean and the

seafloor, and the incredible diversity of life therein, as it under­

goes increasingly rapid change due to human activities. A sus­

tained commitment to technology development is integral to

competing in that race. President J.F. Kennedy, who was a strong

advocate for ocean exploration, marine conservation, and weather

research, summed it up well at his 1961 commencement address at

the US Naval Academy:

Knowledge of the oceans is more than a matter of curiosity. Our

very survival may hinge upon it.

REFERENCES

Alldredge, A.L., B.H. Robison, A. Fleminger, J.J. Torres, J.M. King, and W.M. Hamner.

1984. Direct sampling and in situ observation of a persistent copepod aggrega­

tion in the mesopelagic zone of the Santa Barbara Basin. Marine Biology 80:75–81,

https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00393130.

Alter, K., J. Jacquemont, J. Claudet, M.E. Latuca, M.E. Barrantes, S. Marras,

P.H. Manríquez, C.P. González, D.A. Fernández, M.A. Peck, and others. 2024.

Hidden impacts of ocean warming and acidification on biological responses of

marine animals revealed through meta-analysis. Nature Communications 15:2885,

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-47064-3.

Archibald, K.M., D.A Siegel, and S.C. Doney. 2019. Modeling the impact of zooplank­

ton diel vertical migration on the carbon export flux of the biological pump. Global

Biogeochemical Cycles 33(2):181–196, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GB005983.

Bach, L.T., and P.W. Boyd. 2021. Seeking natural analogs to fast-forward the assess­

ment of marine CO2 removal. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

of the United States of America 118(40):e2106147118, https://doi.org/10.1073/

pnas.2106147118.

Barber, R.T. 1988. The Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute.

Oceanography 1(2):52, https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.1988.20.

Barry, J.P., D. Graves, C. Kecy, C. Lovera, C. Okuda, C.A. Boch, and

J.P. Lord. 2017. Chasing the future: How will ocean change affect marine life?

Oceanography 30(4):60–71, https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2017.424.

Barry, J.P., S.Y. Litvin, A. DeVogelaere, D.W, Caress, C.F. Lovera, A.S. Kahn, E.J. Burton,

C. King, J.B. Paduan, C.G. Wheat, and others. 2023. Abyssal hydrothermal springs—

cryptic incubators for brooding octopus. Science Advances 9(34), https://doi.

org/10.1126/sciadv.adg3247.

Beebe, William. 1934. Half Mile Down. Harcourt, Brace and Company, 344 pp.

Benoit-Bird, K.J., C.M. Waluk, and J.P Ryan. 2019. Forage species swarm in

response to coastal upwelling. Geophysical Research Letters 46(3):1,537–1,546,

https://doi.org/​10.1029/2018GL081603.

Brierley, A.S. 2014. Diel vertical migration. Current Biology 24(22):PR1074–R1076,

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CUB.2014.08.054.

Brewer, P.G. 2000. Contemplating action: Storing carbon dioxide in the ocean.

Oceanography 13(2):84–92, https://doi.org/​10.5670/oceanog.2000.38.

Brewer, P.G. 2013. A short history of ocean acidification science in the 20th century:

A chemist’s view. Biogeosciences 10:7,411–7,422, https://doi.org/10.5194/

bg-10-7411-2013.

Brewer, P.G., E.T. Peltzer, P.M. Walz, and W.J. Kirkwood. 2017. Creating the art of

deep-sea experimental chemistry with MBARI ROVs. Oceanography 30(4):48–59,

https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2017.423.

Caress, D.W., H. Thomas, W.J. Kirkwood, R. McEwen, R. Henthorn, D.A. Clague,

C.K. Paull, J. Paduan, and K.L. Maier. 2008. High-resolution multibeam, sidescan,

and subbottom surveys using the MBARI AUV D. Allan B. Pp. 47–70 in Marine

Habitat Mapping Technology for Alaska. J.R. Reynolds and H.G. Greene, eds,

Alaska Sea Grant College Program, University of Alaska Fairbanks, https://doi.org/​

10.4027/mhmta.2008.04.

Caress, D.W., D.A. Clague, J.B. Paduan, J.F. Martin, B.M. Dreyer, W.W. Chadwick,

A. Denny, and D.S. Kelley. 2012. Repeat bathymetric surveys at 1-metre resolution of

lava flows erupted at Axial Seamount in April 2011. Nature Geoscience 5:483–488,

https://www.nature.com/articles/ngeo1496.

Caress, D.W., E.J Martin, M. Risi, G. Troni, A. Hamilton, C. Kecy, J.B. Paduan,

H.J. Thomas, S.M. Rock, M. Wolfson-Schwehr, and others. 2025. The MBARI

low altitude survey system for 1-cm- scale seafloor surveys in the deep ocean.

IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering 50(3):1,573–1584, https://doi.org/10.1109/

JOE.2024.3521256.

Chavez, F.P., P.G. Brewer, and C.A. Scholin. 2017a. Celebrating 30 years of ocean

science and technology at the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute.

Oceanography 30(4):18–25, https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2017.420.

Chavez, F.P., J.T. Pennington, R.P. Michisaki, M. Blum, G.M. Chavez, J. Friederich,

B. Jones, R. Herlien, B. Kieft, B. Hobson, and others. 2017b. Climate variability and

change: Response of a coastal ocean ecosystem. Oceanography 30(4):128–145,

https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2017.429.

Chavez, F.P., J. Sevadjian, C. Wahl, J. Friederich, and G.E. Friederich. 2018.

Measurements of pCO2 and pH from an autonomous surface vehicle in a coastal

upwelling system. Deep Sea Research Part II 151:137–146, https://doi.org/10.1016/​

j.dsr2.2017.01.001.

Chavez, F.P., R.J. Miller, F.E. Muller-Karger, K. Iken, G. Canonico, K. Egan, J. Price, and

W. Turner. 2021a. MBON—Marine Biodiversity Observation Network: An observ­

ing system for life in the sea. Oceanography 34(2):12–15, https://doi.org/10.5670/

oceanog.2021.211.

Chavez, F.P., M. Min, K. Pitz, N. Truelove, J. Baker, D. LaScala-Grunewald, M. Blum,

K. Walz, C. Nye, A. Djurhuus, and others. 2021b. Observing life in the sea using

environmental DNA. Oceanography 34(2):102–119, https://doi.org/10.5670/

oceanog.2021.218.

Chisholm, S.W., R.J. Olson, E.R. Zettler, R. Goericke, J.B. Waterbury, and

N.A. Welschmeyer. 1988. A novel free-living prochlorophyte abundant in the oce­

anic euphotic zone. Nature 334(6180):340–343, https://doi.org/10.1038/334340a0.

Choy, C.A., S.H.D. Haddock, and B.H. Robison. 2017. Deep pelagic food web struc­

ture as revealed by in situ feeding observations. Proceedings of the Royal

Society B 284:20172116, https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2017.2116.

Revelle was a pioneer in oceanography who over his 50-year career pursued innovative research and

created a vision that still influences the field of oceanography to this day. A strong proponent of sci­

ence communication and public policy, Revelle was a leader in encouraging the scientific community

to devote time to address the “long-range problems of society” (Day, 2000, quoting Revelle, 1957).

For his contributions to geophysics, Revelle was elected to membership in the National Academy of

Sciences (NAS). Revelle’s commitment to science policy is evident in his extensive contributions to the

work of the NAS. Revelle served as a member of the Ocean Studies Board and its predecessor (Ocean

Sciences Board) from 1983 to 1987. He also served on the Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate

(1982–1986) and as a committee member for several influential National Academies’ studies.

Roger Revelle

Photo credit: SIO Archives, UCSD

Oceanography | Early Online Release

Choy, C.A., B.H. Robison, T.O. Gagne, B. Erwin, E. Firl, R.U. Halden, J.A. Hamilton,

K. Katija, S.E. Lisin, C. Rolsky, and K.S. Van Houtan. 2019. The vertical distribu­

tion and biological transport of marine microplastics across the epipelagic and

mesopelagic water column. Scientific Reports 9:7843, https://doi.org/10.1038/

s41598-019-44117-2.

Claustre, H., K.S. Johnson, and Y. Takeshita. 2020. Observing the global ocean with

Biogeochemical-Argo. Annual Review of Marine Science 12:23–48, https://doi.org/​

10.1146/annurev-marine-010419-010956.

Coale, K.H., K.S. Johnson, S.E. Fitzwater, R.M. Gordon, S. Tanner, F.P. Chavez, L. Ferioli,

C. Sakamoto, P. Rogers, F. Millero, and others. 1996. A massive phytoplankton

bloom induced by an ecosystem-scale iron fertilization experiment in the equatorial

Pacific Ocean. Nature 383:495–501, https://doi.org/10.1038/383495a0.

Crosby, A., E.C. Orenstein, S.E. Poulton, K.L.C. Bell, B. Woodward, H. Ruhl, and

K. Katija. 2023. Designing Ocean Vision AI: An investigation of community needs

for imaging-based ocean conservation. Pp. 1–16 in Proceedings of the 2023

CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Article No. 535,

https://doi.org/​10.1145/3544548.3580886.

Day, D. 2000. Quotations from Roger Revelle. Scripps Institution of Oceanography

Archives, eScholarship, The Regents of the University of California,

https://escholarship.org/​uc/item/79d3n7n2.

Delmont, T.O., M. Gaia, D.D. Hinsinger, P. Frémont, C. Vanni, A. Fernandez-Guerra,

A.M. Eren, A. Kourlaiev, L. D’Agata, Q. Clayssen, and others. 2022. Functional reper­

toire convergence of distantly related eukaryotic plankton lineages abundant in the

sunlit ocean. Cell Genomics 2(5):100123, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xgen.2022.100123.

Dietz, R.S. 1962. The sea’s deep scattering layers. Scientific American 207(2):44–51.

Doney, S.C., D.S. Busch, S.R. Cooley, and K.J. Kroeker. 2020. The impacts of ocean

acidification on marine ecosystems and reliant human communities. Annual

Review of Environment and Resources 45(1):83–112, https://doi.org/10.1146/

annurev-​environ-​012320-083019.

Ficetola, G.F., C. Miaud, F. Pompanon, and P. Taberlet. 2008. Species detection

using environmental DNA from water samples. Biology Letters 4(4):423–425,

https://doi.org/​10.1098/rsbl.2008.0118.

Findlay, H.S., R.A. Feely, K. Grabb, E.B. Jewett, E.F. Keister, G. Kitch, Y. Artioli,

P. Bhadury, J. Blackford, O. Crabeck, and others. 2025. Perspectives on marine

carbon dioxide removal from the Global Ocean Acidification Observing Network.

Oceanography 38(3):24–39, https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2025.e308.

Friederich, G.E., P.G. Brewer, R. Herlein, and F.P. Chavez. 1995. Measurement of

sea surface partial pressure of CO2 from a moored buoy. Deep-Sea Research

Part I 42(7):1,175–1,186, https://doi.org/10.1016/0967-0637(95)00044-7.

Girard, F., D.W. Caress, J.B. Paduan, L.A. Kuhnz, S.Y. Litvin, E. Flattery, A.S. Kahn,

A. Devogelaere, E.J. Burton, C. Lovera, and E.J. Martin. 2024. Habitat heteroge­

neity over multiple scales supports dense and diverse megafaunal communi­

ties on a northeast Pacific ridge. Limnology and Oceanography 70(2):377–392,

https://doi.org/​10.1002/lno.12766.

Haddock, S.H.D. 2004. A golden age of gelata: Past and future research on plank­

tonic ctenophores and cnidarians. Hydrobiologia 530/531:549–556, https://doi.org/​

10.1007/s10750-004-2653-9.

Haddock, S.H.D., L.M. Christianson, W.R. Francis, S. Martini, C.W. Dunn, P.R. Pugh,

C.E. Mills, K.J. Osborn, B.A. Seibel, C.A. Choy, and others. 2017. Insights into the bio­

diversity, behavior, and bioluminescence of deep-sea organisms using molecu­

lar and maritime technology. Oceanography 30(4):38–47, https://doi.org/10.5670/

oceanog.2017.422.

Hildebrand, J.A. 2009. Anthropogenic and natural sources of ambient noise in

the ocean. Marine Ecology Progress Series 395:5–20, https://doi.org/10.3354/

meps08353.

Hobson, B.W., J.G. Bellingham, B. Kieft, R. McEwen, M. Godin, and Y. Zhang. 2012.

Tethys-class long range AUVs: Extending the endurance of propeller-driven cruis­

ing AUVs from days to weeks. Pp. 1–8 in 2012 IEEE/OES Autonomous Underwater

Vehicles (AUV), Southampton, UK, September 24–27, 2012, https://doi.org/​10.1109/

AUV.2012.6380735.

Honjo, S., T.I. Eglinton, C.D. Taylor, K.M. Ulmer, S.M. Sievert, A. Bracher, C.R. German,

V. Edgcomb, R. François, M.D. Iglesias-Rodriguez, and others. 2014. Understanding

the role of the biological pump in the global carbon cycle: An imperative for ocean

science. Oceanography 27(3):10–16, https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2014.78.

Huang, B., P.W. Thorne, V.F. Banzon, T. Boyer, G. Chepurin, J.H. Lawrimore,

M.J. Menne, T.M. Smith, R.S. Vose, and H.-M. Zhang. 2017. Extended recon­

structed sea surface temperature version 5 (ERSSTv5): Upgrades, validations, and

intercomparisons. Journal of Climate 30(2):8,179–8,205, https://doi.org/10.1175/

JCLI-D-16-0836.1.

Johnson, K.S., and H. Claustre. 2016. Bringing biogeochemistry into the Argo age.

Eos 97, https://doi.org/10.1029/2016EO062427.

Johnson, K.S., H.W. Jannasch, L.J. Coletti, V.A. Elrod, T.R. Martz, Y. Takeshita,

R.J. Carlson, and J.G. Connery. 2016. Deep-Sea DuraFET: A pressure tol­

erant pH sensor designed for global sensor networks. Analytical

Chemistry 88(6):3,249–3,256, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.5b04653.

Karl, D.M., and R. Lukas. 1996. The Hawaii Ocean Time-series (HOT) pro­

gram: Background, rationale and field implementation. Deep Sea Research

Part II 43:129–156, https://doi.org/10.1016/0967-0645(96)00005-7.

Karl, D.M. 2010. Oceanic ecosystem time-series programs: Ten lessons learned.

Oceanography 23(3):104–125, https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2010.27.

Karl, D.M. 2014. The contemporary challenge of the sea: Science, society, and sustain­

ability. Oceanography 27(2):208–225, https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2014.57.

Katija, K., E. Orenstein, B. Schlining, L. Lundsten, K. Barnard, G. Sainz, O. Boulais,

M. Cromwell, E. Butler, B. Woodward, and K.L.C. Bell. 2022. FathomNet: A global

image database for enabling artificial intelligence in the ocean. Scientific

Reports 12:15914, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-19939-2.

Keeling, C.D., S.C Piper, R.B. Bacastow, M. Wahlen, T.P. Whorf, M. Heimann, and

H.A. Meijer. 2001. Exchanges of Atmospheric CO2 and 13CO2 with the Terrestrial

Biosphere and Oceans from 1978 to 2000: Part I. Global Aspects. SIO Reference

Series No. 01-06, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, San Diego, CA, 88 pp.

Kelly, R.P., J.A. Port, K.M. Yamahara, and L.B. Crowder. 2014. Using environmen­

tal DNA to census marine fishes in a large mesocosm. PLoS ONE 9(1):e86175,

https://doi.org/​10.1371/journal.pone.0086175.

King, C., and J. Brown. 2019. Corals, sponges, and an octopus garden in Monterey

Bay National Marine Sanctuary. Pp. 52–53 in New Frontiers in Ocean Exploration:

The E/V Nautilus, NOAA Ship Okeanos Explorer, and R/V Falkor 2018 Field

Season. N.A. Raineault and J. Flanders, eds, Oceanography 32(1), supplement,

https://doi.org/​10.5670/oceanog.2019.supplement.01.

Levin, L.A., J.M. Alfaro-Lucas, A. Colaço, E.E. Cordes, N. Craik, R. Danovaro,

H.-J. Hoving, J. Ingels, N.C. Mestre, S. Seabrook, and others. 2023. Deep-sea

impacts of climate interventions. Science 379(6636):978–981, https://doi.org/​

10.1126/science.ade7521.

Liniger, G., J.D. Sharp, Y. Takeshita, and K.S. Johnson. 2025. Two decades of

increase in Southern Ocean net community production revealed by BGC-Argo

floats. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 39:e2024GB008371, https://doi.org/​

10.1029/2024GB008371.

MacFarling Meure, C., D. Etheridge, C. Trudinger, P. Steele, R. Langenfelds,

T. van Ommen, A. Smith, and J. Elkins. 2006. Law Dome CO2, CH4, N2O Ice

core records extended to 2000 years BP. Geophysical Research Letters 33(14),

https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL026152.

Matsumoto, G.I., K.M. Lodes, T.J. Kennedy, and J.L. Magnusson. In press. Engaging

students with Ocean technology: A journey from floats to Ocean Literacy. Chapter 7

in Ocean Literacy: The Foundation for the Success of the Ocean Decade—

Volume I: Transforming Education, Research, and Engagement. T.J. Kennedy, ed.,

Springer Nature.

Mayer, L.A. 2006. Frontiers in seafloor mapping and visualization. Marine Geophysical

Research 27:7–17, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11001-005-0267-x.

Messié, M., R.E. Sherlock, C.L. Huffard, J.T. Pennington, C.A. Choy, R.P. Michisaki,

K. Gomes, F.P. Chavez, B.H. Robison, and K.L. Smith. 2023. Coastal upwelling

drives ecosystem temporal variability from the surface to the abyssal seafloor.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

120(13):e2214567120, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2214567120.

NASEM (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine). 2022.

A Research Strategy for Ocean-based Carbon Dioxide Removal and Sequestration.

The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, https://doi.org/10.17226/26278.

Oestreich, W.K., B. Abrahms, M. McKenna, J. Goldbogen, L. Crowder, and J. Ryan.

2022. Acoustic signature reveals blue whales tune life history transitions to

oceanographic conditions. Functional Ecology 36(4):795–1,073, https://doi.org/​

10.1111/1365-2435.14013.

Oestreich, W.K., K.J. Benoit-Bird, B. Abrahms, T. Margolina, J.E. Joseph, Y. Zhang,

C.A. Rueda, and J.P. Ryan. 2024. Evidence for seasonal migration by a cryptic

top predator of the deep sea. Movement Ecology 12:65, https://doi.org/10.1186/

s40462-024-00500-x.

Pace, N.R. 1985. A molecular view of microbial diversity and the biosphere.

Science 276(5313):734–740, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.276.5313.734.

Packard, D. 1989. Welcoming remarks to The Oceanography Society at its inaugural

meeting. Oceanography 2(2):46–47, https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.1989.15.

Paduan, J.B., R. Zierenberg, D.A. Clague, R. Spelz-Madero, D.W. Caress, G. Troni,

H. Thomas, J. Glessner, M.D. Lilley, T. Lorenson, and others. 2018. Discovery

of hydrothermal vent fields on Alarcon Rise and in southern Pescadero Basin,

Gulf of California. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems 19(12):4,788–4,819,

https://doi.org/​10.1029/2018GC007771.

Paull, C.K., W. Ussler III, D.W. Caress, E. Lundsten, J. Barry, J. Covault, K. Maier, J. Xu,

and S. Augenstein. 2010. Origins of large crescent-shaped bedforms within the

axial channel of Monterey Canyon. Geosphere 6:755–774, https://doi.org/10.1130/

GES00527.1.

Payne, R., and S. McVay. 1971. Songs of humpback whales.

Science 173(3997):585–597, https://doi.org/​10.1126/science.173.3997.585.

Preston, C., K. Yamahara, D. Pargett, C. Weinstock, J. Birch, B. Roman, S. Jensen,

B. Connon, R. Jenkins, J.C. Ryan, and C. Scholin. 2023. Autonomous eDNA col­

lection using an uncrewed surface vessel over a 4200 km transect of the Eastern

Pacific Ocean. Environmental DNA 6(1):e478, https://doi.org/10.1002/edn3.468.

Reisenbichler, K.R., M.R. Chaffey, F. Cazaneve, R. McEwen, R. Henthorn, R.E. Sherlock,

and B.H. Robison. 2016. Automating MBARI’s midwater time-series video sur­

veys: The transition from ROV to AUV. Pp. 3,027–3,035 in Proceedings, MTS IEEE

Oceans 2016 Conference, Monterey, CA, September 19–23, 2016, https://doi.org/​

10.1109/oceans.2016.7761499.

Revelle, R., and H.E. Suess. 1957. Carbon dioxide exchange between atmosphere

and ocean and the question of an increase of atmospheric CO2 during the past

decades. Tellus 9:18–27, https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusa.v9i1.9075.

Early Online Release | Oceanography

Ritchie, G.S. 1953. The deep scattering layer. The Journal of Navigation 6(4):395–402,

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0373463300027855.

Robison, B.H. 1983. Midwater biological research with the WASP ADS. Marine

Technology Society Journal 17:21–27.

Robison, B.H. 2004. Deep pelagic biology. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology

and Ecology 300(1–2):253–272, https://doi.org/10.1016/​j.jembe.2004.01.012.

Robison, B.H., K.R. Reisenbichler, and R.E. Sherlock. 2005. Giant larvacean

houses: Rapid carbon transport to the deep sea floor. Science 308:1,609–1,611,

https://doi.org/​10.1126/science.1109104.

Robison, B.H., K.R. Reisenbichler, and R.E. Sherlock. 2017. The coevolution of mid­

water research and ROV technology at MBARI. Oceanography 30(4):26–37,

https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2017.421.

Robison, B.H., and S.H.D. Haddock. 2024. Discovery and description of a remark­

able bathypelagic nudibranch, Bathydevius caudactylus, gen. et. sp. nov. Deep-Sea

Research Part I 214:104414, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr.2024.104414.

Roux, S., M. Krupovic, D. Debroas, P. Forterre, and F. Enault. 2015. Assessment of viral

community functional potential from viral metagenomes may lead to discovery of

novel virus functions. PeerJ 3:e887, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsob.130160.

Ryan, J.P., K. Benoit-Bird, W.K. Oestreich, P. Leary, K.B. Smith, C.M. Waluk, D.E. Cade,

J.A. Fahlbusch, B.L. Southall, J.E. Joesph, and others. 2022. Oceanic giants dance

to atmospheric rhythms: Ephemeral wind-driven resource tracking by blue whales.

Ecology Letters 25(11):2,435–2,447, https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.14116.

Ryan, J.P., W.K. Oestreich, K.J. Benoit-Bird, C.M. Waluk, C.A. Rueda, D.E. Cline,

Y. Zhang, T. Cheeseman, J. Calambokidis, J.A. Fahlbusch, and others. 2025. Audible

changes in marine trophic ecology: Baleen whale song tracks foraging conditions

in the eastern North Pacific. PLoS ONE 20(2):e0318624, https://doi.org/10.1371/jour­

nal.pone.0318624.

Sakamoto, C.M., K.S. Johnson, L.J. Coletti, T.L. Maurer, G. Massion, J.T. Pennington,

J.N. Plant, H.W. Jannasch, and F.P. Chavez. 2017. Hourly in situ nitrate on

a coastal mooring: A 15-year record and insights into new production.

Oceanography 30(4):114–127, https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2017.428.

Sarmiento, J.L., K.S. Johnson, L.A. Arteaga, S.M. Bushinsky, H.M. Cullen, A.R. Gray,

R.M. Hotinski, T.L. Maurer, M.R. Mazloff, S.C. Riser, and others. 2023. The Southern

Ocean carbon and climate observations and modeling (SOCCOM) project: A review.

Progress in Oceanography 219:103130, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2023.103130.

Saw, J., L. Luo, K. Chu, J. Ryan, K. Soga, and Y. Wu. 2025. Distributed acoustic sensing

for whale vocalization monitoring: A vertical deployment field test. Seismological

Research Letters 96(2A):801–815, https://doi.org/10.1785/0220240389.

Schevill, W.E., and B. Lawrence. 1949. Underwater sounds heard from sperm whales.

Nature 164(4172):766.

Schlining, B.M., and N.J. Stout. 2006. MBARI’s video Annotation and Reference

System. Pp. 1–5 in OCEANS 2006. Boston, MA, USA, September 28–21, 20026,

https://doi.org/10.1109/OCEANS.2006.306879.

Schofield, O., A. Fassbender, M. Hood, K. Hill, and K. Johnson. 2022. A global

ocean biogeochemical observatory becomes a reality. Eos 103, https://doi.org/​

10.1029/2022EO220149.

Scholin, C.A., J. Birch, S. Jensen, R. Marin III, E. Massion, D. Pargett, C. Preston,

B. Roman, and W. Ussler III. 2017. The quest to develop ecogenomic sensors:

A 25-year history of the Environmental Sample Processor (ESP) as a case study.

Oceanography 30(4):100–113, https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2017.427.

Smith, K.L., Jr., A.D. Sherman, P.R. McGill, R.G. Henthorn, J. Ferreira, and C.L. Huffard.

2017. Evolution of monitoring an abyssal time-​series station in the northeast Pacific

over 28 years. Oceanography 30(4):72–81, https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.​

2017.425.

Smith, S.M., O. Geden, M.J. Gidden, W.F. Lamb, G.F. Nemet, J.C. Minx, H. Buck,

J. Burke, E. Cox, M.R. Edwards, and others, eds. 2024. The State of Carbon Dioxide

Removal 2024 - 2nd Edition. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/F85QJ.

Smith, W.H.F., and D.T. Sandwell. 1997. Global seafloor topography from satellite altim­

etry and ship depth soundings. Science 277(5334):1,956–1,962, https://doi.org/​

10.1126/science.277.5334.1956.

Stoeckle, M.Y., J.H. Ausubel, G. Hinks, and S.M. VanMorter. 2024. A poten­

tial tool for marine biogeography: eDNA-dominant fish species differ among

coastal habitats and by season concordant with gear-based assessments.

PLoS ONE 19(11):e0313170, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0313170.

Takahashi, T., S.C. Sutherland, R. Wanninkhof, C. Sweeney, R.A. Feely, D.W. Chipman,

B. Hales, G. Friederich, F. Chavez, C. Sabine, and others. 2009. Climatological mean

and decadal change in surface ocean pCO2, and net sea–air CO2 flux over the

global oceans. Deep Sea Research Part II 6(8–10):554–577, https://doi.org/10.1016/​

j.dsr2.2008.12.009.

Thompson, D’A.W. 1910. The History of Animals by Aristotle Written 350 BCE. Book IV,

Part 9, translated by D’Arcy Wentworth Thompson, Clarendon Press, http://classics.

mit.edu/Aristotle/history_anim.html.

Thomson, C.W., J. Murray, G.S. Nares, and F.T. Thomson, eds. 1887. Report on the

Scientific Results of the Voyage of HMS Challenger During the Years 1873–76

Under the Command of Captain George S. Nares and the late Captain Frank

T. Thomson, RN. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

Thorne, K.M., G. MacDonald, F.P. Chavez, R.F. Ambrose, and P.L. Barnard. 2024.

Significant challenges to the sustainability of the California coast considering cli­

mate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United

States of America 121(32):e2310077121, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2310077121.

Troni, G., S. Rodríguez-Martínez, D. Caress, E. Martin, P. Roberts, and K. Barnard.

In press a. 3D seafloor mapping with scalable marine robotics in Monterey Bay.

In Nature’s Canvas: A Collection of Stunning Submarine Landforms. R. Durán,

A. Micallef, A. Savini, S. Krastel, eds, Editorial CSIC Press.

Troni, G., S. Rodríguez-Martínez, A. Savini, A. Micallef, E. Martin, P. Roberts, J. Fuentes,

and V. Sufán. In press b. Exploring the Salas y Gómez Ridge: 3D seafloor mapping

with scalable robotics. In Nature’s Canvas: A Collection of Stunning Submarine

Landforms. R. Durán, A. Micallef, A. Savini, S. Krastel, eds, Editorial CSIC Press.

Truelove, N.K., E.A. Andruszkiewicz, and B.A. Block. 2019. A rapid environmental DNA

method for detecting white sharks in the open ocean. Methods in Ecology and

Evolution 10(8):1,128–1,135, https://doi.org/​10.1111/2041-210X.13201.

Truelove, N.K., N.V. Patin, M. Min, K.J. Pitz, C.M. Preston, K.M. Yamahara, Y. Zhang,

B. Raanan, B. Keift, B. Hobson, and others. 2022. Expanding the temporal and

spatial scales of environmental DNA research with autonomous sampling.

Environmental DNA 4:972–984, https://doi.org/10.1002/edn3.299.

Urmy, S.S., and K.J. Benoit-Bird. 2021. Fear dynamically structures the ocean’s

pelagic zone. Current Biology 31(22):P5,086–5,092.E3, https://doi.org/10.1016/​

j.cub.2021.09.003.

Venter, J.C., K. Remington, J.F. Heidelberg, A.L. Halpern, D. Rusch, J.A. Eisen, D. Wu,

I. Paulsen, K.E. Nelson, W. Nelson, and others. 2004. Environmental genome shot­

gun sequencing of the Sargasso Sea. Science 304(5667):66–74, https://doi.org/​

10.1126/science.1093857.

Widder, E.A., S.A. Bernstein, D.F. Bracher, J.F. Case, K.R. Reisenbichler, J.J. Torres,

and B.H. Robison. 1989. Bioluminescence in the Monterey Submarine Canyon:

Image analysis of video recordings from a midwater submersible. Marine

Biology 100(4):541–551, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00394831.

Widder, E. 2016. The fine art of exploration. Oceanography 29(4):170–177,

https://doi.org/​10.5670/oceanog.2016.86.

Yamahara, K., C. Preston, J. Birch, K. Walz, R. Marin III, S. Jensen, D. Pargett, B. Roman,

Y. Zhang, J. Ryan, and others. 2019. In situ autonomous acquisition and preser­

vation of marine environmental DNA using an autonomous underwater vehicle.

Frontiers in Marine Science 6:373, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2019.00373.

Zhang, Y., J.P. Ryan, B.W. Hobson, B. Kieft, A. Romano, B. Barone, C.M. Preston,

B. Roman, B-Y. Raanan, D. Pargett, and others. 2021a. A system of coordinated

autonomous robots for Lagrangian studies of microbial communities in the open-

ocean deep chlorophyll maximum. Science Robotics 6, https://doi.org/10.1126/​

scirobotics.​abb9138.

Zhang, Y., B. Kieft, B.W. Hobson, B.-Y. Raanan, S.S. Urmy, K.J. Pitz, C.M. Preston,

B. Roman, K.J. Benoit-Bird, J.M. Birch, and others. 2021b. Persistent sampling

of vertically migrating biological layers by an autonomous underwater vehi­

cle within the beam of a seabed-mounted echosounder. IEEE Journal of Oceanic

Engineering 46(2):497–508, https://doi.org/10.1109/JOE.2020.2982811.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was supported by the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI)

with funding from the David and Lucile Packard Foundation. The author acknowl­

edges many contributions and informative discussions with his MBARI colleagues

who helped to shape this article, in particular Kelly Benoit-Bird, Peter Brewer,

James Barry, James Birch, Dave Caress, Francisco Chavez, Nancy Jacobsen-Stout,

Ken Johnson, Eve and Lonny Lundsten, Raúl Nava, Bruce Robison, John Ryan,

Rob Sherlock, Yui Takeshita, Susan von Thun, Giancarlo Troni, and Yanwu Zhang. With

great appreciation, the author also thanks the Ocean Studies Board for extending the

invitation to present this overview at the 26th Annual Roger Revelle Lecture and to the

National Academies for hosting the event. Stacee Karras and Claudia Benitez-Nelson

graciously and patiently provided invaluable assistance with preparing and improving

this presentation and made significant contributions to developing the concepts on

which it is based. The author also thanks Oceanography editor Ellen Kappel for her

work to improve the final version of this manuscript ahead of its publication.

AUTHOR

Chris Scholin (scholin@mbari.org), Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute,

Moss Landing, CA, USA.

ARTICLE CITATION

Scholin, C. 2025. Oceanography in the age of intelligent robots and a changing

climate. Oceanography 38(3), https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2025.e310.

COPYRIGHT & USAGE

This is an open access article made available under the terms of the Creative

Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/

by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in

any medium or format as long as users cite the materials appropriately, provide a

link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate the changes that were made to

the original content.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15