MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967860462 · doi:10.5194/bg-12-2707-2015

Autonomous profiling float observations of the high-biomass plume downstream of the Kerguelen Plateau in the Southern Ocean

2015· article· en· W1967860462 on OpenAlexaff
Mélanie Grenier, Alice Della Penna, Thomas W. Trull

Bibliographic record

VenueBiogeosciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAntarctic Climate and Ecosystems Cooperative Research CentreUniversité de ParisCampus FranceCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
KeywordsWater columnMixed layerPhytoplanktonOceanographyStratification (seeds)PlumeEnvironmental sciencePlateau (mathematics)Chlorophyll aOcean colorOcean gyreSpatial variabilitySurface waterTemperature salinity diagramsAtmospheric sciencesSalinityGeologySatelliteChemistryEcologyGeographyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Natural iron fertilisation from Southern Ocean islands results in high primary production and phytoplankton biomass accumulations readily visible in satellite ocean colour observations. These images reveal great spatial complexity with highly varying concentrations of chlorophyll, presumably reflecting both variations in iron supply and conditions favouring phytoplankton accumulation. To examine the second aspect, in particular the influences of variations in temperature and mixed layer depth, we deployed four autonomous profiling floats in the Antarctic Circumpolar Current near the Kerguelen Plateau in the Indian sector of the Southern Ocean. Each "bio-profiler" measured more than 250 profiles of temperature (T), salinity (S), dissolved oxygen, chlorophyll a (Chl a) fluorescence, and particulate backscattering (bbp) in the top 300 m of the water column, sampling up to 5 profiles per day along meandering trajectories extending up to 1000 km. Comparison of surface Chl a estimates (analogous to values from satellite images) with total water column inventories revealed largely linear relationships, suggesting that these images provide credible information on total and not just surface biomass spatial distributions. However, they also showed that physical mixed layer depths are often not a reliable guide to biomass distributions. Regions of very high Chl a accumulation (1.5–10 μg L−1) were associated predominantly with a narrow T–S class of surface waters. In contrast, waters with only moderate Chl a enrichments (0.5–1.5 μg L−1) displayed no clear correlation with specific water properties, including no dependence on mixed layer depth or the intensity of stratification. Geostrophic trajectory analysis suggests that both these observations can be explained if the main determinant of biomass in a given water parcel is the time since leaving the Kerguelen Plateau. One float became trapped in a cyclonic eddy, allowing temporal evaluation of the water column in early autumn. During this period, decreasing surface Chl a inventories corresponded with decreases in oxygen inventories on sub-mixed-layer density surfaces, consistent with significant export of organic matter (~35%) and its respiration and storage as dissolved inorganic carbon in the ocean interior. These results are encouraging for the expanded use of autonomous observing platforms to study biogeochemical, carbon cycle, and ecological problems, although the complex blend of Lagrangian and Eulerian sampling achieved by the floats suggests that arrays rather than single floats will often be required, and that frequent profiling offers important benefits in terms of resolving the role of mesoscale structures on biomass accumulation.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations27
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiogeosciencesSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207