Seasonal phytoplankton development and new production in the central Greenland Sea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The seasonal development of the phytoplankton in the central Greenland Sea, based on sampling at different time intervals in the period 1993–1995, is consistent with patterns observed in adjacent similar regions. Phytoplankton growth started in early May and developed gradually through May reaching a peak in early June. The spring phytoplankton was mainly composed of diatoms and the prymnesiophyte Phaeocystis pouchetii. Spring primary production rates, as determined by the radioactive carbon method, averaged 752 mg C m-2 d-1 during May and June. The summer situation was characterised by strong stratification and an upper mixed layer of about 30 metres that became completely depleted of nutrients and contained low phytoplankton biomass by August. New production in the growing season from May to August, estimated from the total production and published f-ratios was 52 g C m-2, while new production estimated from the disappearance of nitrate in the same period, along a transect across the central Greenland Sea, was 62 g C m-2. These results are in good agreement with those from previous investigations and provides the basis for an assessment of the role of biology on the carbon cycling in the central Greenland Sea when discussed in relation to the inorganic carbon cycling and related biological processes in the area.
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) | 0.000 | 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".