MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143238975 · doi:10.4319/lo.2013.58.3.0893

Assessment of light absorption within highly scattering bottom sea ice from under‐ice light measurements: Implications for Arctic ice algae primary production

2013· article· en· W2143238975 on OpenAlexafffund
Jens K. Ehn, C. J. Mundy

Bibliographic record

VenueLimnology and Oceanography · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesArcticNetNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsSea iceEnvironmental scienceIrradianceOceanographyAlgaeAtmospheric sciencesAbsorption (acoustics)Biomass (ecology)ArcticChlorophyll aPhysicsGeologyBiologyEcologyOpticsBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Primary production estimates of ice algae within the bottommost layers of the Arctic ice cover are commonly derived using irradiance measurements taken immediately below the solid ice bottom. However, radiation absorbed by ice algae is significantly affected by the high‐scattering sea ice environment they are embedded within because scattering increases the pathlength traveled by photons and therefore the probability of photon encounters with algal cells. Failing to account for this enhanced absorption may considerably affect estimates of the timing and magnitude of ice algal production. To demonstrate the effect of scattering and attenuation, multipliers for absorption amplification (Φ) and layer average opacity (χ) were derived from observations of chlorophyll a concentration and the vertical attenuation coefficient over the bottom 2.5 cm of landfast sea ice. Φ reached values over 19 at low chlorophyll a, but became < 2 at high biomass levels, whereas χ became larger as biomass levels increased. Using Φ to construct an apparent photosynthesis vs. irradiance relationship showed that light limitation is greatly reduced relative to the case where scattering is not considered. This highlights an important interaction not previously noted for ice algal production in their high‐scattering environment. Knowledge of this absorption amplification can help explain ice algal phenology during the spring bloom and will improve ice algal production estimates and model parameterizations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations40
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLimnology and OceanographySame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207