Altered inherent optical properties and estimates of the underwater light field during an <scp>A</scp>rctic under‐ice bloom of <i><scp>P</scp>haeocystis pouchetii</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In spring 2015, we observed an extensive phytoplankton bloom of Phaeocystis pouchetii , with chlorophyll a concentrations up to 7.5 mg m −3 , under compact snow‐covered Arctic sea ice at 80–81°N during the Norwegian young sea ICE (N‐ICE2015) expedition. We investigated the influence of the under‐ice bloom on inherent optical properties (IOPs) of the upper ocean. Absorption and scattering in the upper 20 m of the water column at visible wavebands increased threefold and tenfold, respectively, relative to prebloom conditions. The scattering‐to‐absorption ratio during the Phaeocystis under‐ice bloom was higher than in previous Arctic studies investigating diatom blooms. During the bloom, absorption by colored dissolved organic matter (at 375 nm), seemingly of autochthonous origin, doubled. Total absorption by particles (at 440 nm), dominated by phytoplankton (>90%), increased tenfold. Measured absorption and scattering in the water were used as inputs for a 1D coupled atmosphere‐ice‐ocean radiative transfer model (AccuRT) to investigate effects of altered IOPs on the under‐ice light field. Multiple scattering between sea ice and phytoplankton in the ocean led to an increase in scalar irradiance in the photosynthetically active radiation range ( E o (PAR)) at the ice‐ocean interface by 6–7% compared to prebloom situation. This increase could have a positive feedback on ice‐algal and under‐ice phytoplankton productivity. The ratio between E o (PAR) and downwelling planar irradiance ( E d (PAR)) below sea ice reached 1.85. Therefore, the use of E d (PAR) might significantly underestimate the amount of PAR available for photosynthesis underneath sea ice. Our findings could help to improve light parameterizations in primary production models.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".