Temporal and spatial distribution of dimethylsulfide in the subarctic northeast Pacific Ocean: a high-nutrient–low-chlorophyll region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dimethylsulfide (DMS) was measured in the upper 400 m of the northeast Pacific from February 1996 to June 2001. The sampling took place along Line P (48°34.5’N, 125°30’W to 50°N, 145°W). DMS concentrations increased diurnally from a pre-dawn low to a mid-day maximum and from coastal waters to open ocean, in a high-nutrient—low-chlorophyll-a(HNLC) water mass. The mean surface DMS in winter was 2 nM, in spring 6 nM and in summer 10 nM. Our June surface DMS amounts were comparable with those obtained by the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory. A sea to air flux of DMS at Station P (50°N, 145°W) was high in the summer of 1997 and the early autumn of 1998 and 2000 and was significantly higher than at other Line P stations. The average flux along Line P was 27 µmol m−2 dm−1 by Wanninkhof’s formula while that by Liss and Merlivat was 16 µmol m−2 dm−1. DMS profiles showed a decreasing trend with depth, as did temperature and chlorophyll-a (Chl-a), but an increasing trend with salinity and nitrate. Average DMS concentrations at mixed-layer depth (DMSMLD) were low in winter at an average of 2.4 nM, moderate in spring at 8 nM and high in summer at 16 nM. For open ocean stations P20 and P26 DMSMLD was high, while Chl-a MLD was low for late spring and early summer during 1996–1998. That is the “summer paradox” phenomenon. The ratio of DMSMLD to Chl-a MLD was out of phase with the mixed-layer depth. Our data confirm the high DMS concentrations previously reported for this region and suggest that this is characteristic of the subarctic HNLC region.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".