“…These cellular nutrient quotas are invariant for fixed stoichiometry models (i.e., at Redfield proportions; Aumont et al., 2015; Dunne et al., 2010; Ilyina et al., 2013; Moore et al., 2004) or can be variable, dependent on in situ environmental parameters such as nutrient concentration (Galbraith & Martiny, 2015) or optimal resource allocation theory describing phytoplankton cellular functions (Dunne, 2013; Klausmeier et al., 2004; Kwiatkowski et al., 2018). Many culture and field observations have documented variability in cellular nutrient quotas that vary both with ambient nutrient concentrations (Karl et al., 2001; Rhee, 1978; Tanioka et al., 2022) and/or across PFTs (Baer et al., 2017; Geider & La Roche, 2002; Martiny et al., 2013a; Quigg et al., 2003). Additionally, with the emergence of flow cytometry for the study of marine microbes (Lomas et al., 2011), a large literature of field and culture‐based studies have accumulated in recent decades describing the physiology, biogeography, and phylogeny of marine pico‐phytoplankton, more specifically the cyanobacterial lineages Prochlorococcus and Synechococcus and pico‐eukaryotic phytoplankton, which now allows for their representation in numerical marine ecosystem models (e.g., Baer et al., 2017; Buitenhuis et al., 2012; DuRand et al., 2001; Flombaum et al., 2013, 2020; Martiny et al., 2009; Moore et al., 1998; Partensky et al., 1999; Pasulka et al., 2013; Sohm et al., 2016).…”