MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1724974053 · doi:10.1029/2007gb003029

Seasonal cycle of O<sub>2</sub> and <i>p</i>CO<sub>2</sub> in the central Labrador Sea: Atmospheric, biological, and physical implications

2008· article· en· W1724974053 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Arne Körtzinger, U. Send, Douglas W.R. Wallace, Johannes Karstensen, M. D. DeGrandpre

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Biogeochemical Cycles · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSink (geography)Mixed layerEnvironmental scienceOceanographyBloomAtmospheric sciencesSpring bloomCarbon cyclePhytoplanktonGeologyChemistryEcosystemNutrientEcologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present full 2004–2005 seasonal cycles of CO 2 partial pressure ( p CO 2 ) and dissolved oxygen (O 2 ) in surface waters at a time series site in the central Labrador Sea (56.5°N, 52.6°W) and use these data to calculate annual net air‐sea fluxes of CO 2 and O 2 as well as atmospheric potential oxygen (APO). The region is characterized by a net CO 2 sink (2.7 ± 0.8 mol CO 2 m −2 yr −1 ) that is mediated to a major extent by biological carbon drawdown during spring/summer. During wintertime, surface waters approach equilibrium with atmospheric CO 2 . Oxygen changes from marked undersaturation of about 6% during wintertime to strong supersaturation by up to 10% during the spring/summer bloom. Overall, the central Labrador Sea acts as an O 2 sink of 10.0 ± 3.1 mol m −2 yr −1 . The combined CO 2 and O 2 sink functions give rise to a sizable APO flux of 13.0 ± 4.0 mol m −2 yr −1 into surface waters of the central Labrador Sea. A mixed layer carbon budget yields a net community production of 4.0 ± 0.8 mol C m −2 during the 2005 productive season about one third of which appears to undergo subsurface respiration in a depth range that is reventilated during the following winter. The timing of the spring bloom is discussed and eddies from the West Greenland Current are thought to be associated with the triggering of the bloom. Finally, we use CO 2 and O 2 mixed layer dynamics during the 2005 spring bloom to evaluate a suite of prominent wind speed‐dependent parameterizations for the gas transfer coefficient. We find very good agreement with those parameterizations which yield higher transfer coefficients at wind speeds above 10 m s −1 .

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.603

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.197 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations75
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Biogeochemical CyclesSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207