Seasonal dynamics of bacterial biomass and production in a coastal arctic ecosystem: Franklin Bay, western Canadian Arctic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian Arctic Shelf Exchange Study (CASES) included the overwintering deployment of a research platform in Franklin Bay (70°N, 126°W) and provided a unique seasonal record of bacterial dynamics in a coastal region of the Arctic Ocean. Our objectives were (1) to relate seasonal bacterial abundance (BA) and production (BP) to physico‐chemical characteristics and (2) to quantify the annual bacterial carbon flux. BA was estimated by epifluorescence microscopy and BP was estimated from 3H‐leucine and 3H‐thymidine assays. Mean BA values for the water column ranged from 1.0 (December) to 6.8 × 105 cells mL−1 (July). Integral BP varied from 1 (February) to 80 mg C m−2 d−1 (July). During winter‐spring, BP was uncorrelated with chlorophyll a (Chl a), but these variables were significantly correlated during summer‐autumn (rs = 0.68, p < 0.001, N = 38), suggesting that BP was subject to bottom‐up control by carbon supply. Integrated BP data showed three distinct periods: fall‐winter, late winter–late spring, and summer. A baseline level of BB and BP was maintained throughout late winter–late spring despite the persistent cold and darkness, with irregular fluctuations that may be related to hydrodynamic events. During this period, BP rates were correlated with colored dissolved organic matter (CDOM) but not Chl a (rs BP.CDOM∣Chl a = 0.20, p < 0.05, N = 176). Annual BP was estimated as 6 g C m−2 a−1, implying a total BP of 4.8 × 1010 g C a−1 for the Franklin Bay region. These results show that bacterial processes continue throughout all seasons and make a large contribution to the total biological carbon flux in this coastal arctic ecosystem.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".