Evidence of O<sub>2</sub> consumption in underway seawater lines: Implications for air‐sea O<sub>2</sub> and CO<sub>2</sub> fluxes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We observed O2 deficits of 0.5 to 2.0% (1 to 4 μmol/kg) in the underway seawater lines of three different ships. Deficits in O2/Ar and isotopic enrichments in dissolved O2 observed in underway seawater lines indicate a respiratory removal process. A 1% respiratory bias in underway lines would lead to a 2.5–5 μatm (2.5–5 μbar) enhancement in surface water pCO2. If an underway pCO2 bias of this magnitude affected all measurements, the global oceanic carbon uptake based on pCO2 climatologies would be 0.5–0.8 Pg/yr higher than the present estimate of 1.6 Pg/yr. Treatment of underway lines with bleach for several hours and thorough flushing appeared to minimize O2 loss. Given the increasing interest in underway seawater measurements for the determination of surface CO2 and O2 fluxes, respiration in underway seawater lines must be identified and eliminated on all observing ships to ensure unbiased data.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".